The Sun. — London, England, 1842-04-12 00:00:00

IMP-RI . AMENT. HOUSE OF LO.RDS,ApriI 11. The Lotto eIfANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool sack shertly before Five o'Clock. MERCHANT AND FACTORS BILL. Earl RIPON gave notice that he should move the seeonl reading of this Bill on Thursday next. NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND). Lord BANDON presented a petition from a place in Ireland, against the present- system of national educa tion in Ireland. SEVERN NAVIGATION BILL. The Bishop of GLOUCESTER presented a petition against this Bill. EXCHEQUER BILLS COMMISSION BILL. The Duke of WELLINGTON gave notice that be should move the second reading of this Bill to-morrow. Lord BROUGHAM said he would give the Noble Duke ample notice of any amendment that he might have to propose on the Bill. IRISH AGRICULTURE. The Marquis of CLANRIC:CRDE presented a petition from Galway, praying the House to afford protection to Irish agriculture. INCOME TAX. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from the cor poration of writers of Dundee, against this tax, praying 'that the House would not sanction any Act which did not afford to - the petitioners protection and relief. IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. The NOBLE Loan then presented a petition from the inmates of the Queen's Bench Prison against imprison ment for debt ; and another petition from another class of prisoners against the abolition of an indulgence called a " day rule.", . SEVERN NAVIGATION BILL. • Lord REDESDALE presented a petition from the fishermen on the Severn, praying that in the Bill, provi sion might be made to enable their boats to pass the locks and weirs on the Severn. Lord LY'rULETON presented a petition in favour of the Severn Navigation Bill. Lord SO.Nllt! presented several petitions from places in the County of .Norfolk, against th e p ropose d a l terat i on iu the Corn-laths, • The Severn Navigation Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed on Thursday. THE GREENWICH HOSPITAL SCHOOLS. Lord DUNCANNON gave notice that on Thursday next, he would call the attention of his Noble Friend (Lord Ileddington) at the head of the Admiralty, to the state of the Royal Schoels in connexion with Greenwich Hospital. CHANCERY REFORM. Lord CAMPBELL, in moving the Order of the Day ` ter the second reading of the Privy Council Appeals Bill, , eseed that he thought it would be convenient to discuss e tliose Bills which stood for second reading this evening as parts of one measure. The object of the first was to -:transfer the appellate jurisdiction of the Privy Council to their Lordships' Housethat of the second was to create a permanent Judge of Chancery—and of the third, to allow their Lordships to sit upon appeals during thepe riod of the Parliainentary recess. To him it appeared that the greatest inconvenience connected with the present practice of the Court of Chancery arose from the cir cumstance of the Chief Judge being removable with every change of Ministers. The number of appeals bad greatly increased since the augmentation of the Vice-Chancery Courts, and the augmenta- Lion was going on at a very rapid rate. W hen 'the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack decided a case in the Court of Chancery, it' the parties made an appeal to that House he would hear it in a most fair and dispassionate manner, and he would be ready at any time to reverse his decision. But what was the feeling of the public upon it ? That feeling was described by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, who said it ivas contrary to analogy, that prevailed in all the lower establishments. This evil would continue unless they eperated the functions of the Lord Chancellor sitting in ' the Court of Chancery and sitting in thellouse of Lords. This was one of the principal alterations contemplated in the In tie Irish Ecclesiastical Court, no man could Sit to hear appeals if he were a Roman Catholic '['hey could have no uniformity in decisions on the same. "subject in England and in Ireland. That House might decide that a Presbyterian mixed marriage was legal, ,but it would not be lick! so in Ireland. This question would soon be argued at their Lordships' bar, and if the marriages were decided to be valid it would subject sininy persons to transportation. For this evil, he knew no remedy but that which be had the honour of proposing to their Lordships. The very circumstance the fact of the contrary de eisions between the two tribunals ought, in his (Lord Campbell's) humble opinion, to convince their Lordships that there ought to be only one tribunal. The decisions of the Judicial Committee were marked by good sense and soundness of argument and doctrine, and their de cisions were now quoted quite as much as the judgments of their Lordships, and yet their decisions might be very different. Take the case of the making a rate ; the Churchwardens might make a rate, and a rate-payer appealing, their Lordships might decide that the Churchwardens were not competent to the making a rate, whilst the Judicial Committee might decide that they were competent. In such a case the parish must most unquestionably be placed in a very unpleasant situation. In marriage cases also, the same thing might result ; and he thought these instances ought to convince their Lordships that there should be only one tribunal ; it there were only one tribunal there would be no fear but that the decisions would be uniform ; and he thought that should induce their Lordships to ..supprt the proposition which he had the honour to make to then. - Formerly, Parlia ment met twice' or thrice a year, and on these occasions the Privy Council used to be summoned to attend to judicial business. It was not Until the reign of Henry VII. that the' Privy Council 'assumed to itself the power of deciding in appeals without the inter position of Parliament. .It . was in the reign of Henry the Eigth, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, called the Committee of the Star Chamber, assumed to itself a power entirely indepen dent of Parliament. The reason why the appeals from the Channel Islands, Jersey, and Guernsey, were trans ferred to the Privy Council was, that during a long period under the Tudors, Parliament was not called together, and the Privy Council were enabled to xert, independently, an authority whi c h th e y could only told legitimately under the sanction of their Lordships ; and if their Lordships agreed to the mea sure which he proposed they would not introduce any innovation, but only recur to the ancient practice of the Administration, according to the consti tution in this country. The object of his measure was to secure uniformity in the administration of justice. The LORD CHANCELLOR did not know whether he ought to be heard at all upon this subject, as the object of the Bill was to shut the doors of the Court of Chan cery against the Lord Chancellor. According to the Bill the Queen would not have the power of placing at the head of the Court the person to whom she con fided the Great Seal. His Noble and Learned Friend near him (Lord Cottenham), whose fitness to fill the high office had been the subject of so much eulogy, could not be appointed if this Bill were passed ; and if her Majesty were desirous of pla,cing upon the bench his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Brougham) whose zea l an d ass id u i ty had despatched is long' arrear of suits and appeals, this Bill would stand in her way.—(He ar , hear.) N a y, I f t h e Noble and Lear ne d Friend (Lord Campbell] was desirous of again serving his country in the ca pacity of' an Equity Jade,-e, he must again go across the Channel, and take his seat upon the bench which he so latelt , adorned. He (herd Campbell) di vided his measure into three Bills. Tt e first object of that Bit: was to abolish the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. It was but nine years since their Lord ships passed a Bill for the purpose of extending the jurisdiction of the Privy Council and for the purpose of enlarging their powers. 'That Bill was maturely con sidered/ at the time. It passed, and passed without or'position either in that House or the other. House of Parliament ; and it gave universal satisfaction. Must they then retrace their steps ? Let them mark the his tory of - that tribunal. It disposed of all cases as they came before it. For the last nine years 116 appeals had been gut rid of. - He would mention one circumstance deeisive of the character of that tribunal. In every case of' importance the judgment was a written judgment, delivered not hastily, but a judgment well considered, a written judgment, to insure its being considered with diligence, attention, and circumspection ; and he (the Lord Chancellor) appealed to those very reports to which the'. Noble and Learned Lord appealed in confirmation of diligeuce and the legal ability and the sound jralOnaent nienifested in the decisions of that tribunal. Thes. was the Court which this Bill sought to abolish. The tribunal was admirably adapted t o th e b us i ness which it had t o perform.- There were questions of civil and ecclesiastical law. Judges who had been engaged in the Ecclesiastical Courts attended in the Court, and formed part of it, for the pur pose of deciding the quest i on. Again, there were ques tions of equity. There were Judges of the Equity Courts who were members of the tribunal. When ques tions of this kind were disc usse d , their attendance was rectitired to form part of that Court. Again, there were questions of common law thatewere agitated and dis cussed, and on those occasions the Judges of the Com mon Law Courts formed part of the Court. Nay more, there were questions of Hindoo law and Mahomedan law. On these occasions there were gentlemen who had been Judges in India, who attended to give their assist ance. questions of the utmost importance were the re di scussed and decided. This was the tribunal the Noble Lord sought to abolish. He - was sure their Lordships would not assent to the proposition of his Noble Friend. His Noble Friend said he was not reforming, he was only restoring and he re ferred to what. wa s t h e practice in - the ' reign of King Richard the Second. But the question was not what was the practice in the time of Richard the Second but what d was' best to be done now. Hi s Noble Friend that'their Lordships should a tt end all the year r p o r u n ic for e the purpose of hearing app ea l s; t h at was one of his Noble Friends innovations; their attendance, however, was to be volUntary, and thus, while the Noble Lord might be enjoying himself in Scotland, an d another NOble Lord waS regaling himself at his villa in the South of France—(Laughter)—the Chancellor, who sat on the Woolsack, would not have the opportunity of leaving town. ' But what would be the advantage of this? Suppose, now, the Noble Lord who - brought for ward this motion would attend, and another Noble a n d Learned Lord who sat near him (Brougham) would also attend, the tribunal would consist of the Chancellor and his two Noble and Learned Friends.—(Hear, hear.) But his Noble and Learned Friend complained that there were two tribunals. Why, their jurisdictions were quite distinct. The House of Lords decided all cases of equity throughout the United Kingdom, and the Judicial Com mittee -of the Privy Council decided in cases of • equity and common law in the colonies. This law had been in operatisin now for 900 years, and there was no instance INCOME TAX—RIGHT OF PETITION. Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from an individual residing in Gloucestershire, who stated that his property was subject to heavy mortgage debts, and that the pro posed tax upon incomes would be his complete ruin. The petitioner said that there was no necessity for so ravaging a measure—(Hear, hear, and a laugh)— which would abridge the comforts of many, and involve others, situated like himself, in entire ruin. —(Hear, hear.) He moved that the petition be laid on the table. The SPEAKER said if it was a petition against the tax it could not be received. Mr. WAKLEY replied that it was not a petition against the tax, but only informing the House that the , petitioner and others would be ruined by it.—(Laughter.) The petition was then laid on the table. Lord NEWRY presented a petition from Northampton against the reduction of the duty on foreign manufac tured boots and shoes. Sir R. BULK ELEY presented a petition from Bath, against the proposed tariff: Lord JOCELYN presented a petition from Norfolk, against the proposed alteration of the timber duties. Mr. MURPHY presented a petition from Cork, signed by 13,500, against the p aroc hi a l tax i n Ireland, called Ministers' Money. PETITIONS AGAINST THE INCOME TAX. The Order of the Day for the adjourned Debate on receiving a petition was then read, and on the question being put that the petition be brought up, Sir H. PEEL rose and said—Sir, I canna acquiesce 1 1 the motion that this petition be brought up, because I believe that the country generally is adverse to the pro posal.—(Hear.) I do not mean to say that a great number of petitions might not be presented adverse to the financial measure which I have proposed, but they might also be presented at any time adverse to the im position of any impost. At the same time my objec tion to the motion of the Honourable Gentleman is not gronnded on an apprehension that the country generally will declare itself unfavourable to the mea sures which I have thought it my duty to propose. My objection to the motion is founded upon the obliga tion which I think public consideration requires —to sup port that which has been the usage of the House for the last 150 years. lam quite aware that the usage is con sistent with the Standing Orders of the House. It is a.usage or rule almost universally adhered to—l believe, I might say, universally adhered to, for the period which I have mentioned, viz. 150 years. Sir, I am influenced not by a reference to present convenience, but I am influenced by consideration that the business of the country would be injured, were it permitted that obstructions might be offered to any tax necessary for the public service. And it was the same apprehension which influenced the House in maintaining this order. In 1808 this question was discussed, but in that year, as on the former occasion, the question was not so much whether or no the practice should be departed from, but whether or no the petition which was the subject of consideration was directed against the tax then under consideration of the House. I think in 1808 the petition was directed against the Order in Council, and those who contended most strenuously for the presen tation of the petition contended that the rule of the House or the usage of the House did not apply to that case. Mr. Tierney, who was then in opposition, and a high autho rity, expressly said—" If I thought that this was a peti tion directed against a tax, I should most decidedly vote for the motion; because I believe that the presentation of petitions against taxes necessary fur supplying the year ought to be prevented, as every person then would try to shift the burthen from his own shoulders, and the consequence would be such an obstruction to the public business as would be most injurious." This was the opinion of Mr. Tierney. He contended that the petition was not in which the decisions of the two tribunals had • differed, nor could his Noble and Learned Friend point out one instance in which such a thing had occurred. Suppose this measure were passed, the infallible result would be that there might be a Chancellor who had never been in a Court of Equity in his life—would an appeal under such circumstances be satisfactory ? An appeal from a Judge accustomed to i equity all his life ; high in talent, and sound in judg ment ? The appeal under such circumstances must be most unsatisfactory.—(Hear, hear.) Such were the ob servations he had to make on this measure ; he thought it unwise in the extreme, and though he had heard many strange propositions for amending various laws and cus toms of that House, he must say that he thought the proposition of his Noble and Learned Friend was more extravagant, and more objectionable, than any that had . hitherto come under the attention of their Lordships. _.He moved, therefore, that this Bill be rend a second time this day six months. Lord BROUGHAINI did not think it necessary on this occasion to add any thing to what he had said in the course of previous discussions on the Bill. But on referring to some cases in which there had been a vari ance between the Committee of the Privy Council and the Courts below, he believed it would be found that the judgments of the House 'of Lords and the Privy Council did not conflict so much as his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Campbell) supposed. He (Lord Brougham) had once proposed a measure at the end of the session of 1834, which had been referred to by his Noble and Learned Friend, who had stated that that Bill wasfor the purpose of transferring the business of that House to the Judicial Committee. This was not a correct representation. It was not to transfer the appellate jurisdiction at all from that House, but it was for the purpose of enabling that House to avail itself of the help of the Judicial Com mittee auxiliary to the decision of the House. His ob jection to the plan of his Noble and Learned Friend was that it excluded any Judge, unless he were a Peer of Parliament. He should certainly oppose the measure, for he did not think it was at all calculated to improve the Court to which it referred. against the tax, but nothing could be more distinctly expressed than his opinion, that if it had been, he should have considered it his duty to have resisted the petition. Now, Sir, the only two days out of the seven, which her Majesty Government has for the consideration of those measures which are brought forward are Mon day and Friday. These are days supposed to be set apart for the convenience of her Majesty's Government, but in point of fact it is for the convenience of the public. It is a matter of perfect indifference, I need scarcely tell the House, in what. mode I occupy the eight hours—this is to me a matter of perfect indiffe rence. But the two days which - are devoted to the business of the Government are not days set apart for the private convenience of her Majesty's Ministers ; they are days only on which her Majesty's Government can take precedence for their measures. It is well known that upon Tuesday, Wed nesday, and Thursday, other business may be inter posed-between the business of the Government, accord ing to the discretion of individual Members. I know the Members of the House of Commons may, at any time, prolong the proceedings of the House by moving adjournments ; yet still I have that confidence in the disposition of the House of Lords, and in the desire of individual Members to consult the public interest, that I believe no unfair use will be made of this privilege for the purpose of obstructing the pro gress or business •in the House. Yet it is quite clear that if petitions may be presented with respect to taxes under the consideration of the House, and if these peti tions may be debated—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition benches)—in that case it would be quite impos-; sible to proceed with the public business. A most material obstruction might be offered. lam not speak ing of the present time, but you may conceiv e c ases o f imminent wars, in which it would be absolutely necessary to raise immediate supplies for the public service—you may conceive such cases as that referred to by Mr. Hat sell ; similar events might again occur, and the public business might be most seriously affected under such circumstances by the presentation of a vast number of petitions But it is said that we have lately departed from ancient practice, and that Members are now excluded from debating petitions. That restriction, however, is not the consequence of a resolution which would at all times be binding on the House. The resolution that petitions are not to be debated, is not binding, I apprehend, beyond the Session in which it is passed. In cases of Standing Orders, it would, no doubt be competent to the Speaker to interfere at any time, to prevent debates in violation of a Standing Order., But in the case of a mere resolution—the resolution I repeat has no force beyond the existing session. Consequently I apprehend the prevention of debates rests v er y muc h on the same footing with the refusal to receive petitions. It it founded on a sense of public convenience, and is fo:eitied,- by usage. Now, in the one case, I find a usage_ of one hundred and fifty years, and in the other easel find a usage of five years. The one case rests not upon the Standing Orders, but on what is called a rule founded on practice; while the other regulation, I apprehend, rests upon a different autho rity. It is certainly in the power of the House to repeal any rule or resolution of the Heuse.. I am quite aware of the position in which I stand in the present in stance. Ido not at all deny that I have reason to believe that my opinions upon this subject are not those which universally prevail. lat on e admit that it is very unpopular to oppose. the presentation of petitions. It appears to be unpopular. As I said before, I have no personal interest in the matter ; but, at the same time, I know not how a man can properly discharge his duty if he abstain from pressing on this House what he believes to be, most consonant, on the whole, with the public interest. I think it my duty to submit my opinions fairly to the House of Commons, and to take their decision upon the subject, and not at once to assume that a practice of 150 years' standing, should be unhesitatingly repealed. I must therefore persevere in resisting this attempt. The House on the last occasion determined that they would not depart from the usual practice, and their refusal to receive petitions against taxes rested precisely on the same footing as the present motion. Finding myself in one case fortified by the usage of 150 years, in another case fortified only by the usage of five, I feel strongly the inconvenience of now establishing a precedent which in times of greater difficulty might be appealed to for the purpose of embarrassing the public service ; and I must, in compliance with what I feel to be a sense of duty, continue to offer my resistance to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman. In doing that Ido not conceal from myself the power which he and others possess of offering petitions and provoking debate, and that, no doubt, is a power which may subject the House to greater inconvenience than would follow from receiving the petitions.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," from the Oppo sition benches.) But feeling myself right in the objection which I take, I must look to ultimate results, I leave them to exercise their power. I cannot consent to give up that which has been the practice of the House fur so long a period, and I must therefore offer my opposition to theenotion of the Hon. Gentleman. Lord HOWICK said he could assure the Right Hon. Baronet that he agreed with him in his respect for the forms and usages of the House, but he did not think their admiration for those forms and usages—admirable in general, as experience had shown them to be—ought to be a blind and unreasonable one. He thought they were bound in all cases to see whether the reason upon which the existing practice and usage was founded, still existed, and still applied.—(Hear, hear.) If that reason did exist, if the grounds on which the practice was originally established were not removed, then he be lieved it would generally be found to be the soundest wisdom to adhere to it.—(Hear, hear.) Bt if circum stances were changed, if the reasons upon which the usage originally rested no longer applied. then he thought they would act Much more wisely in making that usage conform to the change of circumstances which had taken place since it was first established.—(Hear, hear.) Now, he thought it was shown most clearly on a former evening, by his two Right Hon. Friends, the Members for Bduiburgh and Devonport, that the grounds upon which this practice was originally established no longer existed ; that the change which had taken place in the mode of receiving petitions had removed those grounds; and that since the new mode had been adopted it was im possible that any conceivable number of petitions could interfere with the progress of public business.—(l.lear.) And here he could not help saying that he entirely con curred with the Right Hon. Baronet in attaching the greatest importance to the preservation of the rule and practice of the House, by which the hours of public business on Monday arid on Friday were reserved for the business which was under the charge of her Majesty's Government, because, after all, that was the business of the country; and, as the Right Hon. Baronet had truly stated, it was not for the convenience of her Majesty's Government so much as it was for the general advantage of the country, that consideration should be given to those great questions of general policy which the Government might bring under their notice.—(Hear.) It was to him demonstrated beyond all form of doubt, that the reception of those petitions could in no re spect tend to interfere with the rule of speaking on petitions. On the contrary the maintenance of that rule, as his Right Hon. Friend had clearly shown, would have an opposite effect. -It was the maintenance of the rule, and not its change, which would prevent the time of the House being taken up. That would be the case, and what they were now debating showed that it would be so.—(Hear, hear.) They were going to divide on the motion of his Hon. Friend, the Member for Finsbury, on bringing up a petition ; but supposing his motion was negatived, he could bring up to-morrow another petition and, make a similar motioh—(Hear)—and every Hon. Member might take the sauce course, and they might do so as his Right Hon. Friend had shown when the House went into 'a Committee of Supply, or. upon a mea sure regarding taxation. In every question of proceed ing with the Orders of the Day, and on questions of supply, or taxation every lion. Member entrusted with a petition might get up and state its substance, the number of per sons who signed it, and the opinions expressed by the petitioners; and he asked any Hon. Gentleman who had a short experience of the mode of doing - busi ness in the House, whether that practice would not interfere much more with the transaction of public business, than a change of the old rule The Right Hon. Gentleman said that the receipt ofpeti- Lions would interfere with the imposition of a tax, even in cases where it was most necessary, if allowed to be debated, and that the present rule presses on the same ground, and existed 150 years, but if he (Lord Holvick) was not mistaken no direct and formal re so l u ti on . o f th e house on the subject of not receiving petitions referring to taxation showed any rule with respect to the prevent ing of debates. The distinction between them was, that the one rule of the House was obviously essential to the due conducting of the public business, and the other was not. The rule which prevented debates on the presenting of petitions, which were so numerous that the public business could not be got through, if allowed to be de bated, would, he believed, be considered necessary by nine-tenths of the House, while the other rule was, in their opinion, unnecessary, and therefore that the one rule ought to be maintained, while the other ought not. But when he found that after havingconsiderecl the sub ject for two days—after the adjournment of the question from Friday last, fur the purpose, of enabling the Right Hon. Baronet and the Government to determine on the course they might deem it expedient to adopt--when after such a delay he found that the Right Honourable Baronet, with all his experience, and with all his power of stating most forcibly to the House the arguments by which he had been led to recommend the adoption of any particular course— (Cheers)—when he found that the Right Hon. Baronet had no one reason to allege against the change which Lord CAMPBELL was not in the slightest degree changed in the opinion he had formed, and, in conse quence of which he had introduced this measure. The evils complained of, he was convinced, could only be remedied in the manner he had proposed. His Noble Friend must have been aware that the clause which he had introduced was solely in order to prevent the multiplication of Judges. But his Noble Friend said that he had not brought a charge against the Judicial Committee, who had done their duty in a most exem plary manner. No ; he did not mean to find any fault with the members of that Committee, personally or in dividually ; but he did say, that as a body, they were not competent to the duties which they had to perform. His Noble and Learned Friend not having been able to show the necessity for two tribunals, or that there would be any disadvantage in coalescing these tribunals, though he could crush th ese Bill s b y a ma j or i ty, h e had not de feated the principle, and he (Lord Campbell) hoped that the measure would at another time meet with a better fate.— (Hear, hear.) it was a well-known anecdote that the best speeches for and against the Prisoner's Counsel Bill were made by his Noble and Learned Friend ; his Noble and Learned Friend had also exerted his powers of eloquence in favour of and against various other Bills which had at last been 'carried, mainly owinr , to his efforts; he (Lord (Camp bell) hoped that such would be the case at some future time with this measure. He begged to wi:hdraw his motion. After a few words from Lord BROUGHAM, The Duke of WELLINGTON called the attention of the House to the important functions belonging to the office of the Lord Chancellor of this great empire ; besides that of presiding in the Court of Chancery ; and he trusted that in any Bill which should be brought in, in a future Session, there shOuld be a clause to secure that the person selected to sit on the Woolsack in their Lordships' House should be a barrister of at least fifteen years' standing, - Lord CAMPBELL said that there was not at present any law to require that the person► selected to fill the office of Lord Chancellor should be a . barrister at all. For centuries the office had been tilled by ecclesiastic►d individuals, down to the time of Queen Elizabeth, when Sir Thomas Moore was appointed—the first lay Lord Chancellor for several reigns. The Amendment of the Lord Chancellor that the Bill be read a second time this day six months, was carried without a division, and the House adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, APRIL 11. The SPEAKER took the chair. WIGAN ELECTION. Mr. HAWES brought up the Report of the Wigan Election Copunittae, which declared that Mr. Greenhall was duly elected, that Mr. Cross was not duly elected, and that Mr. Charles Standish ought to have been re turned. GREAT MARLOW ELECTION. Sir J. Y. BULLER brought up the Report of the Great Marlow El ec ti on C omm i ttee, which declared that Sir - William Clayton was not duly elected, and that Mr. Wynn Hampden was duly elected, and ought to have been returned. BELFAST AND CAVEHILL RAILWAY BILL. On the motion of Mr. O'CONNELL, this Bill was read a second time. NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND). Mr. FITZROY presented a petition from Down against the system or . National Education in Ireland, and in favour of that of the Church Education Society. A petition te the same effect was presented by Mr. E. TEN.NENT, from the congregation of Christ Church, Belfast. Captain HAMILTON presented a petition from Aylesbury against the Dog-cart Nuisance in the country, THE TARIFF. Mr. GREENE presented a petition from the curriers, leather cutters, and other persons in Manchester, against the proposed alteration of the duty on leather. Captain BERKELEY presented a petition from Glou cester to the same effect. Sir R. FERGUSSON presented a petition from the provision traders of Londonderry against the proposed alterations in the tariff. Lord F. EGERTON presented a petition from the merchants and traders of Manchester, signed by 24,000 persons, in favour of the financial measures of the Go vernment, and praying the House to adopt them as speedily as possible.—(dear.) Mr. F. FRENCH presented a petition from Roscom mon against the Government measures, and stating that since they were proposed the value of property in that country had fallen 25 per cent.—(Cheers.) An Hox. MEMBER presented a petition from Shields, against the export duty upon coal. WAKEYHLLL INCLOSURE. Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from various poor persons residing in the county of Southampton, against the Wakeyhill Inclosure Bill. They stated that a similar Bill had been brought forward in 1834, which was successfully opposed, but that they had been put to great expense in so doing. He represented that the present Bill was got up by the rich farmers and landowners in that neighbourhood, and that it was an encroachment on the rights of the poor, and they prayed the House not to consent to the Bill. Lord 110 WICK presented a petition from a number of the collieries in the county of Durham, against the proposed impost of 4s. per ton on the exportation of coals. hadbeen proposed, except that it a change—(Cheers) —he (Lord Howick) could have no hesitation whatever as to the vote which he ought to give.—(Cheers.) He felt that the Right lion. Baronet lad stated the case to the House temperately and fairly—(Cheer9—at the same time he regretted exceedingly the course which the Right Hon. B.:ronet had thought it his duty to adopt. Mr. M. MILNES rose amidst loud cries of " (dues tion, question." The Hon. Gentleman said that it was only by considering qUestioris of privilege as distinct from party questions, that their privileges could be maintained. It had only been by se considering the question of pri vilege, that they had been enabled to come to an adjust ment of the question of privilege two years since. It he regarded this question solely as a question of the pri- ' -vileges of Parliament, he might vote ter the proposition of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, did he not anticipate that by acceding to the motion he might run the risk of bringinf , into disrespect the petitions of the country. He knew that generally speakinf , questions regarding tax ation passed unauimously—(Luud laughter)—except on particular . occasions. —(Continued laughter.) It was not generally considered fair or just to deny Money when the necessities of the country required it, except under peculiar circumstances.—(Cheers and laughter.) Now if they received these petitions they would run the risk of the people of this country getting into the habit of petitioning against taxation.—(Roars of laughter.) There was no doubt but that such a habit might be easily got into—(Continued la , ghter)—and a case might well occur in which the H ouse hav i ng unani mously voted a tax, an enormous body of petition s from the people of England might be presented against it. The consequence would be that the detsion of the House on subjects of taxation would be brought into disrespect— (Loud cheers from the Opposition) —and a notion would get abroad that this House did nut fairly represent the opinions of the people.—(lmmenss cheering from the Opposition benches.) He (Mr. Milnes) could not help thinking that the Hon. Member for Finsbury had some notion of the kind in his head when he brought forward the present motion, and that his object was not only to annoy the Government for the time being, but to render the people discontented with the constitution of the House. He, therefore, called upon all Members who were satisfied with the constitution of the House, to consider if it would be wise to abandon what had so long been the constitution of the .House.—(Cheering.) He did not care much for the prescription of 150 years, if there was a good opportunity for repealing that pre scription. But after ten years, if a Government avow edly popular, which had never raised the question, nor remedied this great and glaring abuse—after all these op portunities had been missed, now when a tax was imposed that he bel:eved would lead to fewer petitions from the people of England—that was confessed to be the most equal that was ever proposed—(Laughter)—he thought it strange that they should choose this particular time and moment for the repeal of a prescription of 16 . 0 years. He hoped they would not look at this as a party question. Mr. HENRY BERKELEY said he was loathe to trespass upon the House, but felt it his imperative duty to do so. He held in his hand. a requisition, signed by nearly a thousand of his constituents—(Hear)—and he was aware that a similar one had.been presented to his Hon. Colleague—entreating them to do that whicji the people were precluded from doing, raising their voices against the odious income tax.—(Hear.) It was not for him to say what would be the course of his Hon. Col league, but for himself he felt it to be his duty to speak the voice of his constituents on this occasion. He agreed with them when they expressed their utter disapproba tion of the proposed tax—(Hear, . hear)—and their dis gust at the chicaner 4 - which had kept the people in norance of it until it was too late to petition.—(Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances, he felt it to be his duty- to express the opinions el' his constituents, when they could not, and he should vote with his Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury. He looked upon the right of petition as one of the most valuable privileges the people had, and particularly when the purses of the people were so heavily- assailed, by a heavy and unpre -cedented impost in time of peace, - did he think that right should be maintained.—(Hear.) Lord F. EGERTON thought it would be impossible to conduct the proceedings of any Government, if they were to depart in - any sensible degree from the rule, whether established by resolution or otherwise, against the discussion of' petitions. But he could not do otherwise than concur in the reasons for throwing open as widely as possible the doors of this House to the petitions of the people, as far as the necessities of the Go vernment and the Legislature would permit. He confessed he should vote on the question with much greater readiness if he could see any likelihood, under the sanction of the Speaker, that the practice of this Houo, with regard to the presentation of petitions and the restriction of debate, could be evinced by some more formal proceeding than had yet been been taken. The question being simply one whether this petition should be presented or not, he could not, with whatem er reluctance he might differ with his Right Hon. Friend, but vote vtith the Hon. Member opposite.—(Hear.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL begged to call the attention of the Noble Lord and the House to what had occum d in the early part of the session, when the ques tion was brought before the House, when it was stated by the Speaker:the more formal way or proceed ing would be to move that the resolution of 18a9 be re scinded. In laying down that mode of proceeding, he believed the Speaker was acting according to the forms of the House; and he (Lord J. Russell) had no doubt that in conformity with reason such ought to be the form of the mo tion; because if any other course was adopted, they would have a resolution standing on the Journals of that House to which they would be acting contrary, not having rescinded it. On this motion, the question being put, there appeared Ayes 50, Noes 237. He would now allude to the objections stated by the Right Hon. Gen tleman, and he begged to say a few words on the ques tion himself. The Hon. Gentleman had asked why the late Government had not proposed this reception of petitions ? But it was because he had agreed with the . conduct of the late Government that he gave his support to the reception of this petition. What had been the practice of their ancestors ? did not, like the lion. Gentleman who spoke last, hold himself indifferent to the practice of 150 years, nor was it without great reflection and strong argument that he should be ready 'to overturn so long a practice. The practice used .to be to throw the doors of the House open to petitions, to let them be received, the substance of them stated, and to let other Members debate them. When the grounds of the petition were fairly before the House . , if it were necessary that the time of the House should be occupied with the dis• cussien of those petitions, they were debated. But it had been said that on one particular subject, the en• actment of taxes, this 'extreme liberty was incon venient. But what had Jhey said ? Had they concurred with their masters in this question of the discussion of petitions ? By no means. They had found the practice would leed to serious inconvenience, and therefore put a stop to it, and made other rules with respect to the presentation ofpetitions, resolving that Mem bers presenting petitions should confine themselves to the subject of them, and also prevent other Alembers from speaking on them. Should they depart from the rule in this respect and keep it up only for the seke of restriction, and should they insist on the wisdom of their ancestors, only when that wisdom would lead to the restriction of the presentation of petitions ? He could not take that one-sided view of the question. The Hon. Member said it had been usual to vote taxes unanimously. He believed very few Chancellors of the Exchequer would be disposed to agree with him in that opinion. The House would recollect that there was nothing in the forms of the House to prevent petitions being presented against taxes, which had been already in existence. If they voted the income tax this year, any number of petitions might be presented next year against it. This was an inconsistency. He hoped the House would admit this petition, as well as every other one properly worded. Mr. S. WORTLEY said that he was desirous of saying a few words on the subject under discussion, inasmuch as he was one of those who had supported the opposition of his Right lion. Friend the First Lord of the Treasury, on 'a former evening, t o the proposal of the Honourable Member fur Finsbury. 116 wished to remind the House that the question as it seemed to him before the House was not precisely the same as that on which they had to decide on the former oc casion. The Hon. Member for Finsbury had moved the other evening that the p ract i ce of the House should be discontinued which forbad the reception of the petition against ft tax under the consideration of the House. Now he (Mr. S. Wortlev) so far concurred with his Right Honourable Friend, that he did not feel prepared to vote for the discontinuance of a practice which had been established so many years. He thought that that was a reasonable objection to the former motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, because. he could conceive cases of pressing . emergency, in which it would be desirable to enforce the practice which had been so long in existence of not receiving peti tions against a tax under the consideration of the House. But, at the same time, now that they were called upon to receive a petition against an income. tax, he owned that he doubted whether they would be justified in enforcing the rule in that particular instance. They had been told by his Right Hon. Friend at the head of the Government that the income tax was to be made part of a series of measures ; and he (Mr. S. Wortley) thought it could scarcely be called a tax imposed merely for the service of the pre sent year. He did not think that the remarks of Mr. Hatsell applied to such a case as the present, and it was but just that a penal regulation should be as limited as possible in the construction put upon it by the House. Looking to the particular case before them, and ,looking also to the practice MIA had prevailed in this very session, he did not feel that he would be jus tified in opposing the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbiry. He believed that it appeared in the Appendix to the Votes for that day, th e t a p et i t i on h a d b een pre sented against the poll tax, which was, more strictly than the income tax, a tax for the service of the year. The Riedit Honourable Baronet made a distinction the other night, which was perfectly valid, when he said that this usage should be applied to cases where it was proposed to raise supplies for the year, and not to cases in which it was proposed to raise them for commercial purposes. On the whole he felt himself bound to vote against the Right Hon. Baronet on the present occasion. Sir J. GRAHAM said he could not understand the distinction which had been drawn by his Right Honourable Friend the. Member for the West Riding of Yorkshire, . but - it was quite clear that he intended to vote against what lied been the usage of the House for 150 years. He (Sir James Graham) would not trouble the House with any declara tion of his sincere respect for the general right of the subject to petition; but on the Other hand he could not conceal from himself the vast importance of respecting a usage which bore date from the period of the Revolution, when the rights and liberties of the people of this coun try had been so nobly vindicated' and so recently trium phant. For 150 years, upon grounds which were clearly intelligible, this usage had been uninter rupted. It was quite true that it was accompa nied with right of speech,' but all the constitutional authorities agreed in stating, that had the practice been to receive petitions it would be impossible for the ser vants of the Crown to carry through that House any Tax Bill which might be unpopular—and it was the usual fate of Tax Bills to be unpopular.—(Hear, hear.) He, (Sir James Grah am ) could not therefore confine his view to the narrow circumstances of the present moment—(Heal., hear, hear)—but as a servant of the Crown, it was his duty to consider what would be the effect of the first departure from the established usage.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He found the invaluable and inalienable right of the people to present petitions restricted in the peculiar case progress t o is f ag t e he of:iruaiun, Parliament, a Tax Bill through Parliam en t. It' this House depa r t e d f rom the ancient and establi s h e d which restricted the right of the presentation o f petitions dur i ng the proaTess of a • Fax Bill, supposing, in any future' Parliament, the more ancient practice should be broken through, and the modern usage resumed of presenting petitions against Tax Bills, he then felt that the power of the Crown, i n cases of great emergency, on which the fate of this country might depena, was gone—the power of the Crown surrendered up by the present servants of her Majesty. That was a re sponeibility which he for one was not prepared to incur ; and Viking the most dispassionate view 'of the question, without reference to present circumstances, but to what he believed to be the interest of the country and the prerogative of the CroWn, he considered it is consistent with his sense of duty—of the weight of that responsibility. He should, therefore, without hesitation, give his vote against the motion of the Hon. Gentleman. Lord J. MANNERS said that the Right Hon. Baro net had appealed to the House to vote in accordance with the principles of theßevolution, soon after which this rule had been established. Those Hon. Gentlemen who esteemed Revolutions in general might vote with the Right Hon. Baronet, but for his own part he must say that if the value of the rule was to be estimated according to the value of the RevolUtion it was very little worth indeed. Captain HAMILTON rose amidst loud cries of " Di vide, divide." He said he would not detain the House for any length of time. On the last occasion he stated the general grounds of his opposing the motion of his lion. Friend the Member for Finsbury, and though it appeared to him from the state of the House that he was going to be in a minority, he would not on that account change his' opinion on the subject. He would now come to the question before the House, and to the petition; and whose petition was it ? It was the petition of the lawyers and gentlemen of Finsbury. He allowed their petition was entitled to the considera tion of the House, but he would again repeat that it was not. to be considered as the petition of the people ssene rally— (Cries of Question," and " Oh, oh") —but of the unproductive classes; and, therefore, he would not consent that the rule of the House should be departed from.—(Cries of "Divide. divide.") Lord SANDON would not long detain the Hoese ; .but having yoted with the majority on the former occa sion, he wished to say that he would also now vote against the motion of the Hon. Member. After the expe rience which they had of the inconvenience that arosefrom Hon. Gentlemen being allowed to speak on petitions, he could not vote for the present motion till he had similar security that the departure from the rule in the present instance would not be attended with simi lar inconvenience, and lead to the same result. The CHANCELLOR of the 'EXCHEQUER wished merely to observe upon one point, of the question before them. If the House assented to the present motion, they would be placed in a most inconvenient and extra ordinary position. If Hon. Gentlemen wished to alter a practice of 150 years' standing, it was perfectly competent to propose a resolution for the purpose of doing so. That course had been taken on Thursday last, and the House had decided that it would not depart from the practice of 150 years—(Hear)—and yet, on looking at the Journals of the House, he found, within one week after that decision, a motion made to receive a petition, not only contrary to the practice which had been adopted for a hundred and fifty years, but in direct opposition to the resolution by which that practice had been confirmed only on Thursday last. For that reason alone, if there were no other, he should feel bound to vote against the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. Mr. T. DUNCO:',IBE had no hesitation in de claring it to be his intention to do every thing in his power to break down, if possible, the unconsti tutional barrier which had been interposed- between the people and their inalienable right—(Loud cheers) — the right of petitioning the House against a tax. — (Loud cheers.) He was surprised, after having consented to the adjournment in order to give Hon. Gentlemen op posite time to prepare themselves, that they should have come down with no better arguments than that the practice had subsisted for 150 years.—(Cheers.) Unin terruptedly, the Right Hon. Baronet said. He (Mr. D.) had attempted to prove to the House that the practice had not been uninterrupted, and he was sick of repeating that the practice had very frequently been in terrupted.—(Hear, hear.) But admitting, for argument's sake, that the practice hAd been uninterrupted, still no length of time could sanction injustice.—( Loud cheers.) And it was injustice to refuse to receive the petitions of the people, on questions affecting their pecuniary interests.—(Hear, and loud cheers.) But suppose the Right Hon. Baronet to succeed in re jecting this petition to-day, how much further would he be advanced?—(Cheers.) To-morrow he would have to fight the same battle over again. —(Continued cheering.) The bold and proper measure to pursue would be for the Right Hon. Gentleman to come down to the House, and propose the Standing Order to reject the petition. If he did not do so he would have to fight the fight day after day. The Right Hon Gentleman said his tax was popular. He had taunted them (the Opposition) by asking where was their explosion? Why, they had refused to receive . the petitions of the ' people, they had bound them hand and foot, and then asked why they did not move. They had' gagged them, and asked why they did not speak.—(Loud cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman Would be beat at last. He (Mr. T. Duncombe) would persevere day 'after day, when petitions were sent to hiM, in presenting them to the House, and would leave to the majority of the House the responsibility of rejcting the petitions of the people. —(Loud cheers.) He would persevere in taking the sense of the House on this subject.—(Loud cheers.) Strangers were then ordered to wAhdraw, and the House divided, when the numbers were— For the motion Against the motion Majority against receiving the petition 1 The announcement of the result was hailed with loud and continued cheers by the Opposition benches. THE TARIFF. Mr. DUFF gave notice that he should move that the words " horned cattle" should be omitted from.the tariff: IMPORTATION OF FOREIGN WOOD. Sir IL DOUGLAS gave notice that he would on to morrow move for returns of Foreign Wood entered for home consumption to the end of January 5, 1842. NATIONAL DEBT. Mr. WALLACE gave notice that he would to-morrow make a motion respecting the National Debt, but what the precise nature of it was we could not learn, owing to the noise which prevailed at the time in the House. REC EPTION OF PETITIONS. The Hon. W. COWPER gave notice that he would to-morrow present a petition on the income tax. Sir C. NA PIER wished to know frinn the Speaker, whe ther, as the Right Hon. Baronet was allowed to speak to the main question, the other evening,any other Member would have been allowed to follow him. As a new _Mem ber he felt interested in the question. The SPEAKER said he stated the other night that the Right Hon. Gentleman was perfectly in order. in speaking to the main question• before the House, because; in fact, the original question was included in the question of debate. if any other Hon. Member had wished to speak he would have had an equal right so to do. Mr. BROTHERTON wished to know how the case would have stood if the motion had been for the adjournment of tips House instead of the adjournment of the debate ? The SPEAKER said he apprehended that that was a dis tinct question. At the same time, if an Hon. Member had urged the importance of the subject as a reason why the House should not adjourn, the Hon. Gentleman would see that it would have been im:•o3sible to deny him the right to speak. After a few words from Mr. RIGBY WASON which were inaudible, Sir ROBERT PEEL said he did riot. will to speak on the question of adjournment, but he did wish to speak to the main question. He could not have done so had the Speaker told him that it would be an evasion of a rule of the House, but as the Speaker told him it was not he 1-1 t himself entitled to proceed. Upon the day on which Lord North signified his ie signation of the Government, the motion was " That this House do now adjourn," and Lord North immediately rose to speak upon that question. Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought the Right Hen. Gentle. man was in order in speaking upon the main question. In answer to a question from Mr. Rigby Wason, Sir R. PEEL said there were several trades which would be peculiarly affected by the tariff. At present the holders of ' coffee were subject to a duty of 9d. It was proposed that . they should be subject to a duty of Bd. instead. THE TARIFF. Lord JOHN RUSSELL had understood the Right Hon. Baronet, at the head of the Government, to say, the other even ing, that it was his intention to lay the amended Tariff on the table this evening. He (Lord John Russell) wished to ask whether it was probable that the Tariff would be in pos session of Hon. Members this evening ? Sir ROBERT PEEL had certainly promised that the Tariff should be laid on the table that evening, and he hoped yet that he might be enabled to perform his promise. He trusted that before the House separated he should be able to to lay the amended Tariff on the table. Lord JOHN RUSSELL hoped due notice would be given before the Tariff was taken into consideration. Sir ROBERT PEEL thought there would be ample time for considering the Tariff before any discussion on the subject could came on.---( A laugh. ) COLONIAL PASSENGERS' BILL. Mr. LA BOtiCHERE wished to know on what day it was likely the second reading of the Colonial Passengers' Bill would come on? Mr. GLADSTONE could not at present 6x any day for the second reading. _ MUTINY BILL. Mr. IL BERNAL wished to know if the R'ght. Hon. Gen tleman intended to proceed with the Mutiny Bill this evening? Sir R. PEEL said, that as the Hon. Member had given no tice of his intention to propose a clame in the Mutiny Bill, which would lead to discussion, he (Sir R. Peel) would fix the Bill for to-morrow. REGISTRATION BILL. Mr. RIGBY WASON wi,hei4 to ask the Right Hon. Gen tleman, the Secretary of State for the Flume Department, when he intended to lay the Registration Bill on the table of the House? The Right Hon. Gentleman had given a notice on the subject some weeks since ' and it wa4 imp or t an t th at th e people of th e coun t ry should have ample time to consider the provisions of the Bill. Sir J. GRAHAM said that when the Income Tax Bill, the Tariff, the Poor-law Continuance Bill, and the Colonial Cus toms 13111 should have made some progress, he thought it would be quite time enough to lay the Registration Bill on the table, -(A laugh.) CAPTURES IN THE CHINESE SEAS. Mr. BLEWITT wished to draw the attention of the Go. vernment to a circumstance which had recently occurred in the Chinese seas. It appeared that Sir NV. Norris was Admi ralty Comnissioner _for Hon-Kong. Penang, Singapre, and Malacca. The ship Frient;s had been captured at Hong-Kong, and as Sir W. Norris was at that time at Penang, the Friends was sent to Penang. On her arrival there, Sir W. Norris had left for Singapore, and the Friends was sent after him, but did not arrive there until Sir W. Norris had set off for Malacca. Het Mr. Blewitt) hoped the Government would appoint some additional Admiralty Commissioners for the Chinese Seas. INCOME TAX—ADJOURNED DEBATE. Dr. BO WRING moved the Order of the Day for resuming the Adjourned Debate. The Order of the Day having been read, Dr. BOWRING said that he would venture to entreat the attention of the House to a few observations, b 'cause, though he felt bound to vote against the proposal of the Right Hon. Baronet tie (Dr. Bowring) would na consent to adopt the resolutions of the Noble Lord, the Member for London, ( Lord John Russejl) without some qualification. It was sometimes the privilege of Members of that House, and on this occasi n it was his ( Dr. &wring's) privilege, to gather some consola tion in the.progres: of debates from the concessions mutually made on both sides of the House to thoss great princip:es to which they had been faithful through good report and evil report on all occasions. lie confessed he had heard, with no small gratification, the declaration t•orri the Noble Lord, the Member for London, that he thought the time had come in which a legacy a duty might be conveniently levied on real property. The Noble Lord hail been taunted by the other side, for his declarations on this subject, but he (Dr• 13owring) confessed that he felt great gratification, when he heard the Noble Lord say that the time had arrived when they ought to do away with the mode of taxation on moveable pro perty, inasmuch as it was very unjust, with reference to the proposition of the burden of ,taxation upon real property. He confessed, when he heard the causes of the deficit, he rejoiced that he, for one, had not been a party to the national calamity, which from year to year had made the resources of the State not sufficient for its expenses. If he were called on to give an opinion of the policy that had led to that d-ficit, a great portion of that policy he could not approve. lie knew not what English interest was served when we went to Syria, and established there the dominion of the Turks. He kne,v mit what benefit England had obtained from the blood of thinisands having ran down Mount Lebanon, and flowed, mingling with the waves of the river Jord an . Ile knew not what interest the people of England had in the war in the north-west of India ; did it become England to set a tyrant and an imbecile on the threne instead of a popular ruler? It was stated that ten or twelve thousand human beings hail been sacrificed in this war ; but would the Right Hon. Baronet put an end to that war by any pacific interference? No, ten or twelve thousand more would probably be sacrificed, while the people of England had to pay the expense. He could not understand this way of ba lancing accounts, setting injury against injury, wrong against wrong, and murder against murder. He could. not see what interest the people had in this war, for 'which millions would have to bo wrung from a suffering people. He could not hut feel gratified to find that they were now forced into something like sound principles of taxation. Ne cessity had come to their aid ; so completely had the Right Hon. Baronet, or the Right Hon. Baronet's predecessors. ex hausted the means of levying new revenue from the peopl that it was now necessary to come, with no unsparing hand, upon some other element of wealth. He confessed that the ar gument against a property tax—that it was only intended for a time of war—produced no impression upon his mind. He did not ask whether it was a war tax or a peace tax, but whether it was, or was not a wise and just tax. He believed that if it were equitably levied, it was a tax which public opinion .vould ultimately support. The Right Hon; Baronet, however, had associated his proposal with so much injn4iice, with so much wrong and so much injury, 'than he could not give him his unqualified support.—(llear, hear.) In his . . inflicting the deepest injury on t; - le tad and commerce of country. IVIa7 Irks wit" ..ny manufacturers bud storped their svoi these questions ultl be settle a n d h e considered it A now the (Inv of the :lo use t o t hi n k rat h er o f acting tUsA of speaking. The plan of the Right Hon. Baronet e* st . bold, comprehensive, and well calculated to attain to object, which was to raise a sufficient re v ", e j to meet the exiteacies of the country. The pia'. I ) r,f: et „ . s t on a broad and Lasis. 'File Right.. Hon. I )''''; - to was like a skilful physician, who recommended his pol en *,,„, take. exercise. to use the energies of his boil-, and at the 9 71 0 time gave . him strengthening medicine: .( A lauph.) e/ very obteclionsmsde to the plan of the Right Hot. 13 '!" fa seemed t hint (sir W. James) a convincing proof main outline it was a goad meaQure. He had looked 9 0 , many of the public prints, to se. , the various different oi"" ) / 0 delivered on the subject at public meetings. There wAs;. ht instance, a petition from Readirg to the effect that the Bight Hon. 13aronel was absut to ruin the agriculturists. In colnshire the graziers took the alarm. In fact, in every qu ar 'i a especial fear fur peraliar interests was expressed; but the In' d, feature of the plan, general outline, remained unteue, l3 ; He did not. exaggerate these things; hut he should say nation like Englaad, which had for many years been the x , miration of the world, was more likely than any ()tier t° ' t o tint to cite the jealousy of ;::.foreign states. It was on that zee ° , , ,i r he thought that they should make every exert on in t'' the power to maintain the eminent honour and grandeur of are country. It was said that a tax upon incomes would or, c h unequally ; but he believed that tt.e inequality Wilt mb lia l greater in the case of indirect taxes. He felt, to professional incomes some relief should be granted. case of a professional man with 4001. a year, was ve,y fflie from that of a London proprietor in the receipt of the S !' amount of rent. The one could,pencl the whole of his r , eq, o , whin the other was obliged to make alarm him) forftitare coo :12 gencies. He thought there might be a clear claim to-extinl'th'o when a person lays out a certain sum in insuring his life. for t 0 _,ed from amount of his income he thought he however, t,.. he • .--- .ie might be exe mpts, mind mind the Right Hon. Baronet had b e en alt o g e th er m i s l e d t h e tax. I le d i d not see that this alteratio n i n t he lair s ere when he had confound e d proper t y an d i ncome; an d h e was lead to any of that confusion which some other saggestien.,igte surprised that a man of his acu t eness ceutd have been betrayed tai n ly wou ld, an d h e t h ought it might be adopted by tli e " e el into such an error. A property tax had very many recommen- Hon. Baronet with great benefit. Great inconvenienc.e ee e dations; he believed that it was the wisest. the soundest, and been experieeced from the manner in which the tax hedne i the most economical method for taxation. The advantage of enfo. ced under the former sets. He would take the date soiero , direct taxation was that it could be levied at a comparatively person keeping an academy, and deriving also an ineo _ e on small cost; the machinery, when properly managed, was at- shipping. He might suffer varioas losses from his cone eie e tended with little expense, while the machinery of indirect with shipping, and have his income greaely reduced. ,' i , taxation was multitudinous, vexatious, and very frequently led it would be a vet y hard ease to tax a person of that tle: oes to great abuse. Indirect taxation exposed them to all the an- lion on his income derived from his academy' , fre e nCustomhouse,ee and vexation. of the Customhouse, and to a ll h e was d epr i ve d of the income he derived eel the despoti sm of. th e E xc i se; an d t h e system of di- another source. He hoped the .Right Hon. Baronetwvitt rect taxation w o uld ge t r id o f most o f t h ose evils. manage so, that a person suffering a loss of his Mean t.: te , s The Right Hon. Baronet, }nosing tntroduced the wedge, would property classed in one schedule, would be compensa; a iht be enabled to drive that wedge so as to afford relief to the relief from taxation on property classed in another. ll e t wee' people from those indirect contributions which he believed to the tai would press peculiarly hard on the class he fit t b e $ be the source of extreme and ire ense suffering to the people. tioned, the, class of schoolmavers. it would, he thong" i 'd the Take the article of coffee. He would take the .ralue at bt.,s. ; great hardship, if they were taxed on the whole amount re not there was 84s. per cwt. levied upon it. The mereliant'e income derived from their pupils, while their profits %v e toe d profit was not less than 10 per cent. By the payment of 84s. more than from 51. to 101. on each pupil. He had Me n Iv o' duty the merchant was obliged to put on an additional price of in a homely way, but he hot ed intelligibly, some of the % t he Bs. 4d. per cwt. The profits of the retail de.ler might tions which he thought might be advantageously made 3 1 0. be estimated at 15 per cent., and in consequence of the duty of Right Hon. Baronet's plan. In outline it was great lolly the Bs. 4d. he put on an additional charge of 13s. 10d. ; so preheesive, and as such, would, he hoped, be treated r oi der that there was 235. 3d. in addition to the duty of 84e. House. He was sure that when the House came to e .. ° t 0 a levied by the State, before the coffee could reach the consumer. the tariff, it would not treat it in a spirit of party, hu • The average price of tobacco was 4d. a pound, on which a duty spirit of moderation. : • had of 3s. was levied, on w hi c h t h e i mporter and reta i ler had their Mr. WALLACE said, the Honourable Member w ho r ot profits, as well as on the original cost, so that 250 per cent. was last spoken had gone into tee details of a measure that ° t ot levied on the consumers, in consequence of the system of indi- before the House, and had not entered into the measure , the rect taxation. The price o f sugar was 25st on which the im- was b e f ore i t . H e h ad j ust told them that timber 0" iies, porter and re t a il er l ev i e d 6 s . bd . on t h e consumer. In the " nest-egg " al the agriculturi s t s , b ut h e wou l d a ll o w h i article of tea,the original value was Is. 9(1. per pound, and the (Mr. W.) to suggest that there were other parties o ° 4 o l duty was • , s., on which the importer an d re t a il er h a d t h e i r pro- had their " nest-egg. " The " nest-egg " of the coop - the ir fits to an extent of 25 p er cen t., i n consequence of the present community was secrecy as to their modes of crinductin ci 4 system. There were also . many other articles which business. Their desire was nett° have their modea•of COn"r i or he would no t t h en en t er upon, b ut the ones he enume- business inquired into in any way whatever. Whatever th! not rated were sufficient to show the losses sustained missioners may say, he could assure shim that all intlo r l o to by the community in consequence of the present system. With out of the question. However strict the rules might he respect to th e t ar iff, h e cons id ere d i t a d vantageous as recognis • secrecy, it wou ld i n pract i ce b e repeatedly broken ti eels ing important prin c ipl es , an d h e on l y w i s h e d that, toget h er with They were now debating the question of an income te s e o 0 the weak, he a-t ac k e d th e s t rong monopolist 4 .—(Hear, hear.) 1 great many thi ngs m i g h t b e sa i d in relation to the pos,"ia He was grat e f u l f or w h a t th e Ri g h t H on. Baronet had done; l which the Right Hon. Baronet had placed the country; boil isnd he only regretted that he did net do more. He was sure the first place he thought the R'ght Hon. Gentlem%ert that his (D r . B.' s ) s id e o f the House would have support e d th e b roug h t f orward h i s budget at an unseasonable period, "-Ite Right Hem. Baronet, and if he h a d d one so he should have h i s 1 the end of the financial year, whi c h h e t h ought was 0 0 °. e s' humble but cordial support.—( Hear, hear.) I parliamentary usage. In the course of his Parliaments7 r it4 Mr. GALLY' KNIGHT sa id, t h at hav i ng seen the vehe- I perietice he never k ne w a b u d get brought forward t ill alt el( mence with which the propositi on o f t h e Right Hon. Baronet ; sth of April. Th e bUd get was also b rought forward p i es ele brog was met and combated, he co u ld not suppress his desire, as ' and he never knew a Mi n i ster o f t h e Crown who did la° l 10 a landed Proprietor and and a county Member, from stating forward his whole scheme at once. (Hear, hear.) That W . t if ht his sentiments on the question. The. Noble Lord, the ilember for l view of the matter, and if he were wrong he could be se' o tbs London, endeavoured to establish two points. The first was that I He hail a•so to complain that time had not been giveo.!,oo - necessities of the country were not so great as had been country to understand the q estion. He had likewise to ! represented, and the second that if those necessitiesexisted, . pisin of the eartiality of the measure. He ha d. / N. , they could have been better removed by the measures proposed former oc - ...aiion, adverted to a recollection 0 5 0 1 last year, than by those which were thought forward by the •! that the Right ilon. Ba - ottet had stated that it would he ea; present Government. But whatever those necessities were, .if an income tax dal not embrace the whole of the t hre e e re d a . they were of the cr ea tio n o f th e N o bl e L or d' s Government, and dams. An he w o uld now quote from a speech delirdieol the country would n ever f orge t t h e l egacy hi s Government had the Right Hen. Baronet on the 19th of April, 1833, a 3 prt.b left behind. If th e ma tt er were not notor i ous, he could repre- i glad to see the Right lion. Gentleman, the Memberesa"i' sent it in the shape of a wi ll b equeat h e d b y the late Govern- ' county Cork, in his place. The flight H o n. .Bar° s e l 3; ment, which he would read.—(Laughter.) Imprimis. To th a t t h e INL.ble Lord (Altho r p) did we ll not to • pro r e n t in John Bull, 5,000,0001. of d e bt. A war i n China, a war with I c ome or property tax,.as .it could not b e justified, eV, c ot' (India, and an unsettled boundary with revect to America.— I case of , xtreme necessity, and t• rats two or three e' r sus ls, Hear, hear.) That was what was left by the late Govern- Iby such nita i would, he thought, be very unwise. d o re' ment to the country tax would be a groat re sosrce iii tim e o f necessity, a ll 0 04 ; Sir R. PEEL—There are many codicils.—( Laughter.) i not be unwisely a 'Plied in time of' peace. But if it were •P'' Mr. G. KNIGHT—Yes, there were many codicils; but he t sary to impose such a tax In land ought not to beertemet?u p t l': thought he had gone far enough.—( Hear, hear.) They had be (Mr. Wallace) rid not wish to see Ireland taxecil e li d to provide means to carry out the measures which, however I wished to see that England and Scotland were not tax , li a d, a much they regretted they had been ever undertaken, it was conceived that Scotland shou•d be as exempt as Ire' s : o bjec t ; now necessary to carry out, and of which one was produceve of he should take the sense of the House upon the e oriol e more calamity than any other which could be produced in the With respect to a tax upon property, as distinisuisheu Te e history of England.---( Hear, hear.) It appeared to him that, l tax upon income, the Right Hon. Baronet h a d eel"! the necessities of the country demanded the most rigorous ex- doubted whetaer it would favour the interest• of the lab ? 1 " ertions on their part—necessities whi li have been °cc ssineed population. Would tee light Hon. Baronet say so II": 0 "; by the extraordinary expenditure and impolitic measures of the his Cllr. Wall:ice's) opulent, pr perry and income wf r III; 4 4 late Government. Taxes hat been reckleSsly abaseloned by the • nynious terms.—( Hest, hear, fr nn Sir R. Peel.) N e st e,. late Ministry. When they first took office, they had said that in their apolleatio ..—( Hear, hear.) He did not belie o,"' the Tories had done so much that. there was but little lefs to be t would be l'Onaihle for the Right Hon. Baronet, or 0 14, 1 05 done in the way of repealing faxen° , , yet, Innet Alttiorp had, ' to impose a tax upon proeery separate from income., 04 0 0 shortly after that, taken off the house tax, that tax %hide . (sewed that any distinstion would be unfair. Now, it t esro Honourable Gentleman opposite were anxious to reisnpose. that 7d. in the pound was a very small amount, and "", s r, , and when taking it off', Lord Althorp had said he was- mentioning, b cause, during the war, 10 per cent, wa or: tes ashamed of wh a t h e was d o i ng , b u t th e t ax was so without any difficulty. It sheu.d be retioLected that,... fool: unpopular, that he felt for ce d t o take of the tax. Then, w sit . the war, this country had the ball of commerce at lPst regard to the Post-office. N e v er h a d there .b een i o ri , aless ! There was then continued prosperity, unceasing menelosee an abandonment of so large a resource. The Nse, Lord had : ing. l'here was no man engaged in any prudent kind 0 0 410 accused the Riglat Hoe. Baronet of courting popularity. I ness who d•d not go to bee at night richer than he ros e ....t • I Surely he was not courting popularity by proposing what- had , morning. —t Laughtee ) been branded by the G en tl emen oppos i te with so many oppro- Sir ROBERT PEEL ' —lt would be bett er t o hav eo'l brious epithets.—( Hear, hear.) Surely be was not courting : agaiit.-( Ala tgh. ) et _ . ,1 41 -' popularity by taking away from the great body of his supporterseiLLACE said, at all events, they should " itr" 50 per cent, of the protection which they at present erijoyed. ' expose the affeirs of the distressed eeople, and then ta l :ese l —( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Bat onet was not legislating i per cent. out of their pockets. On those grounds h e JO; for class interests, but fer the benefit of the whole country.— i Parliament ought not to insist on this tax. Pieuty „ ° ,oo e i. ,' (Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had referred to his budget of (Lents had beer, shown to which they could have le ., : e. It: last year. Now, when there was a good. harvest they could ; supply the deficit of revenue, and he hoped, there r ... r ive° expect no revenue from a fixed duty on corn ; and, besi• es, ! House would prevail on the Right Hon. Baronet to lb the he (Mr, Gaily Knight) was convinced that they never ' his scheme_ could maintain a fixed duty. Then, with regard to ' Mr. LIDDELL said, it was perfectly true Ilittl' the timber duties, the .change proposed - last year ' commercial and agricultural classes of the e` ln , Le thes would have operated most injuriously for the Canadas, differing were looking with great impatience to the conclu 3 i"`estit . l oa that point essentially from the plan now proposed. The , debate, out it was not to be expected that a measure % I t : 1 3 alteranon proposed in the Sugar Duties would have destroyed , interests of such importance as the preaent did, 'tweeter., the West Indian planter by admitting slave grown sugar and without considerable discussion. He would, thereforee o o f ' e have violated those principles for which the nation had made for some time on the indulgence of the 110113 e. i e of b t , so many sacrifices, and after all that budget would not have Gentleman who ,had just sat dowae had in the cour e - ud o realised more than 2,C00,000/., and 5,000,000/. were wanted. speech made one most important admission, vchi'„ t , ;,d It was useless for the Noble Lord to try to retail his damaged very satisfactory to the Right Honourable Baronet' P,e, and rejected goods—he might try to sell his stinking fish, but were true, as the Right Honeusable Gentleman es ti he would not be able to get it off his hands. He had not had stated, that a property tax could not be IsEd ° o f l , ! an opportunity of consulting his constituents on the Right pendently of an income tax, what became td' ,i'..:, Hon. Baronet s financial scheme, but he felt himself authorised oppositi o n offered hy Hon. Gentlemen on the ° , t a: els e et to form the best judgment he could on propositions submitted The Right Hon. Gentleman had brought forward ile co asl o ; to Parliament - and to vote upon them according to a whole,' and it would be unfair to the Government t° e silf e e the dictates of his conscience. If he displeased it in detached parts. The only question was, did th e e ale his constituents thus acting they had the remedy its cies of the country require the reposition of the t i a ,:tie 1 1 their own hands when an election took place. One the Right Hon. Baronet had proposed ? He het e t ' j ee red, of the chief objections to the incline tax was its inquisi- the speech of the Noble Lord with surprise and avll': a l, - is,", tonal nature. But it appeared to him that no great mischief was not necessary to go back to the period when " he st . ee could result from the disclosure of the state of a man's affairs tax had been originally proposed, die woule recall 1. " 0 17 e r t o Commissioners who were sworn to secrecy ; besides, the ti on cf the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite to they' e t ( a 11 , 1 ,, Caancellor of the Exchequer had stated that the Rill sheuld he At that period they took office under the auseic, e ' - 0 14 ;eree so framed as to render the measure as little objectionable as and better leader than they ever had since L oru deorh e sili . possible. He could not see the great mischief arising from ( Hear.) At that time their watchwords were, " 14 ~ eie o ft' disclosure where every thing was right; in his own case he troachmcnt, and Peace." The first pledge had he . b e h , should not mind if the amount of his income were published at redeemed by the Reform Act, and althoneh y et 0 4 Charing-cross, because at present the income of every one was jetted to some portions of that mea ure, ie ; ew e doubled in the estimation of his neighbours, and he was ex- must confess that it removed many blend ee r 1) . 4 . ' 4 petted to liS%e up to their erroneous calculation; while, it had now given us a Government such as tied It% a ' l '., iir. in the other case, he would only be expected to spend been seen , n this country—a Government framed o ,,tse et ir..... what he could conveniently afford.--( Hear.) He thought Conservative basis, and resting for support upon th e o°' 007 the tariff would be a great benefit to the commercial stead of on a boroughmongering oligarchy, and 31.1 ue' b, and manufacturing interests, and to the people at large. He ment that might succeed them must likewise res te es ( es ; . was perfectly aware that it would cause some apital to betaken people for support. With regard to retrenchmen t, ,eo ° ore out of one branch of enterprize and directed to another, but this been a retrenchment of revenue with an auemen la e otrY o rs , .- must happen under every great change ; no monopoly could be pendituree and with regard to peace, although the cod it , 13 ,.1.7, broken up, no approach could be made to a more liberal policy not involved in an European war, yet it was inve l ' e , A . e s-e without some parties suffering some inconvenience, but the likely to be quite as long continued atel as exper" e i e - iaer s eell e/ whole community would find themselves in another year in a tish Envoy had been murderered in violation of chant'` t enee more advantageous position than they were at present. He be- tions, by a barbarian Chief beyond the Wes- eft t ,'', 0 4 • lieved after th e t a x had been in operation, many persons would must not go unpunished; and that war had he ill srs , w`','„ieilt ‘.`. blush at the e xpressi -ns they had mode use of with respect to barrass the present Government by their predece'% - t illeeeetra n it ; every day that the settlement of the question was delayed rushed into it in spite of the warnings of the nl' o t e' e e - ett .; the distress of the manufacturing classes increased. The Noble warrior of the age. Surely, the result of the, , J ae D es Lord, the Member for London, had talked of Members upon that ought to have enlightened the Noble '-',.,) el I ti t he side of the House having heads made of clay, but they would as to the estimation in which his dn'" J a soon te of . e still more deserve the reproaches of the Noble Lord if they were held by the country.—( Hear. ) Even diver'ilee•se were to abandon a Government who would give them some supporters of the late Government the gre a laell's) 310'4 protection and throw themselves into the arms of a party who opinion existed on the subject. His (Air. L', by the E pp. would deprive them of all ' . protection. He acknowledged Colleague had.at the last election been prople" t hat . 0 101: e that the landlords were hit very hard by some of the her for South Durham, and, in prop iris; h ` n' , 't the l ers; r i proposals of the Government. The price of their corn Gentleman had said, that although Is . supP a l a the a lt ' o sed j would now be diminish d ; and, again, they were hardly Lord's Government, yet he would impose theal „0 ,, addr ecoe :„ dealt' with in the article of timber, width the landed tion of the Corn-laws. When hie Hon. G' :lea r t he 6° ;,,' ea.' proprietors had hitherto considered as a nest-egg to meet the erectors, he expressed himself as aperoving,;,, to,f l e / oaten any extraordinary expenses, such as the expert.es of elec. ment, but he also expressed his decided ornw sl e ' t her Ho 'Genf. 0 tioneering, for instaece.— ( A laugh.) But for his part he sure inter eriag with the sugar duties. To', Sh red th at t he,' ' should be sorry that his was the only foot not pinched at a demon, the Members for North and Sou ta eg aired t t he/ , period of pressing public necessity. He felt on the whole whom sat on the opposite side of the House! t that So- . . grateful to the Government for the plans they hail brought would vote for a change in the sugar d atj antics' 1 e r f ° ' ' ',.l fkitteln e a ! i en it ' ; di j o s; ; forward, and they should have his most sincere and cordial b w l u e uLd or n d ot h h a e d ar re o f f er a r n e y d thane in isnpetehoebioiTtbheer support.—( Hear, bear.) Mr. ELPHINS i ONE said he wished to state the grounds Wallingford, and alleged that the Hon. G re t d e ell) L." ! o , bir .' ,r upon which he should vote with the Noble Lord, the Alember ceived and misled the farmers. He (M r ' "i i dit "'a' l 'aiwt , s' -$ for the City of London. He was perfectly ready to admit that that if the farmers had been deceived and raj''' . ' ey °N ie l]; Of i 1 if they were devising a new system of t axationle would vote the R est Hon. Baronet or. theGovernmenr. In n! l the pritmli he- ..., fur a tax upon realised property. Th e pres e nt tax was a tax Hon. Baronet's speeches he had pledged himself to elcee thyself; .., upon income, upon the hard earned industry of the people ; the fluctuating duties on corn. It was P e i c ie , e i t r Y ai h l. ad r e : te ‘ 44 . ll ll,. for that he could not vote. I t b a n been . calculated had not pledged himself to no alteration by Mr. M'Gregor that if they were to impose a tax of four Liddell) considered that he (Sir Robert P," e ) , O tt that ( 12 , , , per cent, upon the rent of la n d an d hou ses , they would derive every pledge he had given. If Hon. Gentte a m e. of nor'' , t st," from it an . income of 10,000,000/ or 12,000,0001. a- near ; Ministerial) side of the House had u nd T ica o r. ) lie must t•the-: they would thus be enabled to abolish many of tha main taxes, guage, let them be answerable for it. — to save vast expense in collectine, and to confer upon the that there was great discontent nd the "" rke' ; e sete - e public real benefit. The Right lion. Baronet proposed to country. He was aware that thefairsa that the aP"' - r tieo raise only 3,000,000/. or 4.000,000/ e and if the old tax might in a state of stagnation, and it is believedthe ignorance ape ., 0 be taken as an authority, the expense of collecting would be sion of the dealers had been raised by was likely to haepe .i, a quarter of a million. The Right Hon. Baronet proposed to who had expressed opinioes as to what ,e 4 a through I' , rl' . _ 1 , 7 . , tax incomes of three and of thirty . years' purchase in precisely that branch of trade. W "" n he Ps that the, market.it'oe e e, pe. t i ': g 0 the same manner. If a physician who had an income of other day he saw a placard annou.ncioingeat at _ .. r 10,000/. a-year went to an insurance office, he would be told likely shortly to be supplied 1 wit l such aPPre, heus , to ol' that his income was not worth more than two or three years' Could anything he more visionary than m torts into this CO de, among Ste cattie-dealers owere.:, purchase, whilst 10,e00/. a-Lear in landed property was worth these? He would just refer to the o f the flotti! 0 „T„ o ls. thirty years; yet the Right on. Baronet proposed to tax both from Ireland alone, and he would read . ' The Revenue( I v 1 ; 0 1,1 /e s • of ~-, in the same ratio.—(Cries Hear, hear.") Several Hon, tails extracted from a work entitled Kingdom, w hi c h_ ,a ., ie Gentlemen id the course of the discussion had attempted tion, and Commerce of the United .n te importation ( . ) . 1 . t i. : 0 : 1. tr; show that the working classes of this country would benefit show the extraordinary increase tact ' ten Yea's f r " ra 1 „ e fe:P by the proposed tax, as though they must be benefited b exemption from a tax to which others were subject ; but the In 1825, the imports were 6 1 3,. - 4 ws being an increase o i rig r'' working classes knew that by loosening the capital with which no less than 93,150 oxen an( c l o to.)ai 74,191, and 1835, 8 : 3, i be Y that had taken place within the s, _ cow, and oxen, and fly, _e4 wages were paid you must inflict severe injiry upon them; than 34,6e6. Of sheep, of in . 3,.,61. - Of ,wine, in 1 c, a n irr they knew that when you taxed their bread AO per cent. in one head, being an immense in 5 part of the scheme, they could be no gainers by your taxing number was 6e.9e0, and the other classes three per cent.---( bleat', hear.) Upon look- crease of 310,000. at was higher in London thr a n _ o ll ing at the tariff proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet, he felt aFay the whichapprehensionms'ty had ari4en. lie found . n e st e , bound to say that he thought it a great improvement upon the this moment butchers' bee,n before, with the exeeption _ meat ,: foe.. existing duties ; but there was one vice which pervaded the lieved it had ever whole of it, namely, the continuance of differential duties. i f e ra ss et i i h o a rr o ; B l;o f . r couldound. He thought every "'" " h o i e l or On did he , m . e 3 i 7 e 6 i:2 l these head ' f h a e c i t n s . ' t h. ar, a t° , i t i h er ey p (Hear, hear.) He thought that duties should be merely levied interest of the landed propriet n _ a; that o 7, for the purposes of revenue. It was roposed to impose a that it was not the agriculturists,any more than the consumer, not obtain the best butcher.' ~‘ a i d - r „ it dul of Is only on Canadian timber, He could not ould be a high price. He coincide in the justice of that proposal.—( Hear, hear.) article e th ß er i e s with their Ll' tO ght Hon. Baronet would deal .. a „, CanWa. paid nothing towards the taxes of this country .she did that tariff as it should be dealt with, and that he was fu a lly.' ii i iiter not even pay for the troops stationed there, and it was unjust tart great duties which were demanded of him as 1 11, Ito tell the to injure the people of this country by admitting Canadian , rim- those t empire. He 11 (Mr. Liddell) had ventured in . e Irevn - : ~ her at a nominal duty. It was placing Canada . 'in a better of a great tof the importatien of ca sle r . ~_ eas t • !louse the amous e:aturday ire situation than if she were an integral portion of the e mpire.. - also state to the. House tha . , last • 1 rees t better off He would stated the 3 n voste. According to the proposed plan, Canada would be seen a paragraph in a newspaper, which one _ than Yorkshire. made of live oxen into Scotland_ oflll '' oo, so d cua- portation ever (Mr. Liddell) binelbievot3. Sir W. JAMES deprecated-the continuance of these dis 21'9 head ° sions, which, by delaying the settlement of the question, were had been made into Aberdeen, viz., r THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY MORNING - 1 A PRI L 12, 184 e.