The Sun. — London, England, 1842-04-19 00:00:00

Prr knis complaining of the operation of the Poor-law Amend el% Act generally, and the Bastardy Clause in particular ; G o a Petition horn Bolton, signed by 6,000 persons, stating G o , ! 1 1ire approval of the financial scheme proposed by the it , etriment, and deprecating any unnecessary delay in passing 'kis a law. jitibaIINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND. I,:or' O 'CONNELL presented a petition from an English th r _ e Y.'' ,l l, Sir Charles Wolsey, complaining of the conduct of -st N otk prosecuted for the Crown at the last Assizes in the ' of ieland, in their selecting none but Protestants, he setting aside all the Catholics who were caled on (4 1 7,,! for the trial of Catholic prisoners, and pray ing titi,,ilonse to institute an inquiry into the matter ; also a pe li 4 :•to the same effect, from Armagh, most numerously 4: 0 by persons of the highest respectability, among (44.. was the most Reverend Dr. Croly, the Roman s tr *e Archbishop of Armagh. The Right Honourable tl a arned Gentleman observed that the petition from Sir Wobey had that gi.ntleman' s n a me wr itt en a t the top, tio. l o hanowriting, instead of at the boom of the eti iceo". Wag not, he believed, therefore, perfectly regu p lar, I, 6 „ r dirig to the rules of the House, but it would be 50 in nt of 1 5 , pot T r ile S PEAKER stated that the petition referred to was egulnr, anti could not, therefore, be received. s ior '• O'CONNELL subsequently gave notice that on to -31,13.11)w he would move that the other petition on the same Jt't which he had presented be printed with the votes. , INCOME TAX. s • QUTT presented a petition agai ns t th e i n com e ta x . 'tWe tio JOHN HARMER presented a similar petition from „Corpora n of ull. s t ,. 4 lmain BERNAL presented a petition from Wycombe , I pst the i ncome tax. w l ,'• FA N ARD presented tw o s i m il ar p e titi ons . t h !_r•' CRAIG p resen t e d a pet i t i on f rom t h e Edi n b urg h er of Commerce with a similar pray, er. Il THE TARIFF. l kni r• FRENCH presented a petition from Athlone, in Ire sgainst the proposed tariff. is tk r •'l'• DUNCOMBE presented petitions from the shoe arli of 'Windsor, Southampton, Portsmouth, &c., against te doetion of the duty on foreign boots and shoes. CORN-LAWS. . 14* Row. MaMaxit then presented a petition from Wilts, w the Corn and Provision-laws. 1 1 NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND). RI: Sergeant JACKSON presented several petitions from th t ."lrnek and other places in Ireland, against the present k i . t 4l 'of N a ti ona l Ed uca ti on , an d i n f avour of the sy s te m '4etlby the Church Education Society. RAILWAY BILLS. 4 1 ," How. MEMBER presented two petitions from Chipping hiC 4 t.l', praying for the insertion of a clau-e iato all Railway tii 4 Crtiaking it incumbent on the Railway Companies to main itheir own poor . \ , 1 1 ,1. SYDNEY HERBERT brought up certain papers, s`fwere laid on the table. hail FREAIANTLE presented a petition f r o m the in iest'nts of Rye, in favour of the financial plans of her Ma -I:,_geeernment. litt 4e 7 ELIOT brought up papers, which were laid on the 4 1 . the House. s.' • SUPREME COURT ei OF SCOTLAND. %,,Lt JAMES GRA HAM—Seng the Hon. Member for t o Olock in his place, he (the Ri g ht H on . G en t.) h a d to in. frirn with regret that illness prevented the Lord • Advocate 11,'" attendin the House, and would, probably for some days. t, t herefore hoped the Hon. , ' Member for Greenock would 4Rt to postpone his motion respecting the Supreme Court e otlandfrom to. morrow until the Learned Lord should be to attend. o it 7r• WALLACE regretted the illness of the Lord-Advo• ;and therefore, and also out of respect to the House he N k r • Wallace) would postpone his motion until Thursday the instant. ARNAUT TROOPS. p,, / t ) '• BOWRING gave notice that to. morrow ho would 11 1 , a question to the Right Houourable Baronet at head of her Majesty's Governm en t, asking k t `ther the Right Honourable Baronet had received 14 1 1 communication from our Ambessador at Constan 4.aple respecting the intention of the Turkish Government to Cq e Arnaut irregular troops into Syria ; those troops being ss t s tole class of men who in 1841 were removed from that t tryst the solicitation of the representatives of the Allied 11,, in consequence of the atrocities they had committed on Christian population. 1':: Sergeant JACKSON gave notice that to-morrow he tp t _o move for leave to bring in a Bill to aassimilate the law Velatid as regards the punishment of death to the law in C. ettid, and t o a b o li s h th e p un i s h men t i n cer t a i n cases . C. ore 'of absence was granted to Mr. Hoskins on account of A , DRAINAGE BILL. 1i„,. 1 % P. MAULE wished to put a question to the Right ) 4 ,:' Baronet the Sec re t ar y o f S ta t e f or t h e H ome Depart kV with respect to the D ra i nage Bill. Th e Ri g ht H on . coelet must be aware that th ere were two Bills under the (leration of the Committee up stairs. He was anxious to froin the Right Hon.. Baronet when he would be able to 1 i l i aliee the Drainage Bill into that Hou se ? i t i: GRAHAM could not, at present, name any particu tliet, , but he begged to assure the Right Hon. Gentleman 4, Bill was in a forward state of preparation. * . EXPORT DUTY ON COALS. (as wished to know whether coals taken on board (at t r: ships for the ship's use merely, would be subjected to eli'",,,Yir tended to be imposed upon the exportation of coals? liv e , ROBERT PEEL said that he could not at present N I 'in answer to the question. It was a subject requiring ' Pave consideration. he THE TARIFF. Ifih' BUTT wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet whether, t he the second reading of the Income-tax Bill, he wou ld pro k..ifith the consideration of the tariff, or whether he in -14 to postpone the consideration of the t ar iff un til a ll s•°ns relating to the supply of the year should be disposed of. too , r It. PEEL said that the statement he had made was, that IS,:ished to be certain that e Income-lax Bill would be lkred by t h e House before h th e proceeded with the considers- Se e , l the tariff. It was of great importance that the House I v s ht. decide upon the question of the Income-tax, as, if it Ittjnied the principle, there would be many details to be ks, A T as to the mode of collection. He hoped, however, that sO "cession in Committee would not be very protracted, but roue, te lhe ee not bring forward the tariff until he telt pretty well 4 6e," 1 that the Income-tax would pass. When that ttio,7 l be the ease, he would be perfectly willing to pro -4 h with the tariff. He was as well aware as Ilsm,°ll. Member could be of the importance of taking the % Le one early consideration, and lie trusted that the House kte „7 - torasider that measure as a whole, whenever it should be 'l t iVtled to th e i r cons id era ti on . H e saw no reason w hy t h e *:should not b e su b m i tte d to t h e cons id erat i on o f t h e Com- V,_e in exactly the form in which bad been laid upo n the is Of the House e a ' —•"- TURNPIKE ROADS BILL. t,:_sr e - GRIMSDITCPI would suggest to the Hon. Gent'eman c`,:, him the propriety of postponing the second reading of I s k t !Sirnpike Roads Bill, in order to give the parties interested h_tebecome acquainted with its provisions. NZ.: M. SUTTON was sorry he could not accede to the sug e7lef his Hon. Friend. A D THE INCOME TAX. IL'OBERT PEEL brought in the Incornce tax Bill. SiqPrdere of the Day having been moved that the Bill , I _s'e read a first time, , 7. l sel_st. RUSSELL and Mr. R. Wasoer rose together to ad 'h,7 ti l - 7 House. The latter Hon. Alember was proceeding to ) ,"iihj . 4 he wished to bring a case relating to the liberty of the `7 esi e tleder the notice of the House, when he was interrupted h l _orOrder." i h e wA L L ACE also attempted to address the House, when i l 'l t ee lb SPEAKER interfered and said, that when an Hon. Bi de r brought forward a Bill from the bar of the House t sste, 5 ° in obedience to the order of the House; and no other I ' L llf i lceuld be introduced after it had been moved that such Ne s " taken int• their consideration. The Noble Lord, the Luer for London, was, therefore, in possession of the House. NI, " JOHN RUSSELL then rose, and said that he e ili s e i l i t° speak to the question then before the House. N t • ouse would perfectly well remember that on the question the h eir approbation or disapprobation of the Income-tax, al 501,4 g, h there had been divisions of the Committee, and divi le,,,"? the House, there had been 110 division of the House llei the main question. From some misunderstanding th a t t oo k • lii i , ° _,in the Committee of Ways and Means, the resolution SI, e h ° without any division of the House. Afterwards, when lot l eteport was laid upon the table, he proposed to the House, , ko re Ply a negative to the proposal of an Income-tax, but he ; I 'lli"„ed a resolution containing a general outline of the plan i e tl k it ° he thought ought to be pursued.—( Hear, hear.) ! to rnre t h e euest i oa w hi c h t h e H ouse had now 1 t sbe" i de , and in which many Honourable Members le,,'rier th e y cou ld no t concur w i t h hi m w ith ou t a pproving of ' h° b h t ad proposed on a former occasion, was, whether the 'srs some Hen. Gentleman's prorosal should be accepted, or whe ify other alteration should be approved of by the House. o h , ,9,t division, it being very late at night, and the House Nr c Z ee iat!gued with the several discussions, and the Right Hon. 4 1 , 1i e 1) t intimating that he meant on this day to move the first s N g of the Bill, he (Lord John Russell) thought it more S t h i ',lent not to take a division then. He therefore came simply *i l tuestinn to oppose it as though it were a question for leave , j ori n g in a Bill, to which Bill he had an insuperable ob- TV, He would not attempt then, having already V° 11the House at length upon the question of the NO. he had had the honour to propose—he would riot " . OP t again to go over the general arguments ageing , the '4,• ' it ion. But he must say, that he looked at the conclusion tloi,,e d ebates of last week, and he considered that the argu e,tes„,t„lten used against tisproposition had been unanswered A l , 4 ' "ight Hon. and his colleagues. The general 11 4 ente which he (Lord J. Russell) had attempted to este 3e,te Which several of his Hon. Friends had followed him, 0§ 6 . ° 11 tax ought not to be imposed, except in times ef ex necessity, and that that case of extreme necessity %not arisen ; that there were no such circumstances S e general state of the country which justified k lo tt 4 step, and that the financial difficulties of the itld i , Were such, that much less objectionable measures Zile - L eave been adopted. When he (Lord J. Russell) spoke s",Ler evening, he found that the general course of argu tel 'as not only the course of argument which the Members ii We th t , etn he had generally the hapeiness to agree used, but they by argnments'which were stated very forcibly some years t the Right Hon. Gentleman himself, now the organ of 44sent Government, against imposing such a tax. He was k , L e 're of the arguments at the time last week, but if he tad w e n aware he did not think he could have better tallied l lth n with that Right Hon. Gentleman's. He would IS, fe ese arguments to the House made ‘se of by the Right "t t i rentleman in 1833 upon this subject, in speaking against Ntl h ,,l l ,thorp, then Chancellor of the Exchequer. He then k i::tl it;'"illg could justify the Noble Lord in proposing an income ' ~..teAj e t l iern t ; th ta e x b p u ee t i Lc e as f e of extreme necessit Cheers Peti i Je tting this country, in a time y Of peace ) , e4 d ,ftat an inquisitorial process must be resorted .. to.— , t ahem.) He must have made that declaration in a pro- 'hood, 4St re p:eod, and he then contemplatedhis proposition of 1842. Rye re, when he stated the other objections that were made % t i lts he did tot think it was very justly observed that it o r Y from their disposition to find fault with everything 4po t rkia t Government did, that they ventured to give their t t,, t i rl to a proposal so harmless and unobjectionable eei e 2er an become-tax•—( Hear, hear. ) The Right Hoh. stte ° ran went on to say, " such a tax was a great resource in is , War, and he was therefore unwilling to establish pith an N o as h ns as it would be accompanied with an If e againth it that would render it almost ins , i•,, Se resort to it in a time of extreme necessity." L ,as the objection which he (Lord J. Russell) had ven t, „ T „,,,0, repeat in the name of the Right Hon. Gentleman. He to ventured yentured to make it in such strong language, or to t• e ii_lt . would make it impessible to resort to it in case trat,.t:it in t bssi,sul a time of need, s utthat should would o?ldit give the pope beneceessariy suchto ' Fi ks t ,te,te the tax, and it would become so very unpopular, t i ght be a gr eat bar in the way of any Government N ight wish to establish it in a time of great peril. I N e i: l4 ' k i p t u he,arguments which had been on stated in favour of this m pon which the Right H. Gentleman relied for N 4 tela r i ty, was, t h at i t wou ld on l y a ff ec t p ersons o f ;' - 1 above one hundred and fifty pounds a year ; b 4 „,N eil speaking of the petitions against the tax, 'sl 4 e st invited the poorer classes to petition in favour ,I ok so, order to put down the petitions of those who felt lik e s aggrieved by its being imposed on them. He Itot:' the that that invitation was quite unjustifiable, li, , e 3 `ue persons immediately and directly affected by this tax ti te he °lnch objects of the consideration of the House, being ee • ee ' ‘ . linen, clergymen, and surgeons, persona who were ';.. e gent dis re ring than pint e sore 4! nt at '‘ )os ite 1 F coils quen t ht b • , and if the flea gi6l) ea , u ld.bik e at sys ,r sec urne • 14W, A t ige I the, -la Wst to • slid re w Is ears i •'' saw.' i-law,. 13 per en tlvir t . The inty mut* repeal D g the , soTtgh would of the uturing rep,e 4 werinfc ns:tier- vatic se. ries .16 art' L f , h, Dre 10 " es tber . ely Hea r ' )' . ~ gu ] s r SP . pout' ch 11114 ,ok poit, case s the Per- to t f • , b o th! geer' s i ft ( Pu t • soS i i R ot i icce; i :! ' the dece °l . , o lo in c ell ' ne ,posior reit vote EJ t nd day 1 19 17 ihs frO S and jig tly der 1 , 1, e eri. ce the dace" ' O 4 t . ra 33 s v les° THE STN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, APRIL 19, 1842. strugeling almost with as much difficulty as the common labourer, to maintain their families in that decent respectability which be come those possessed of education, and accustomed to the comforts of life. But he had also stated that though this tax would not directly affect the labouring class, it would indirectly, by diminishing the means of employment. The Right lion. Gentlemen had expressed the same sentiment in 1.033, yet now they were told that it must be a popular tax, by taking advantage of the p •ejudice that might arise that it solely affected the rich. They might depend on it it would affect all classses of labourers, and that the opinion of the Right Honourable Baronet in 1833 would turn out to be a sound one. There was another question with respect to the tax, and of which very little notice had been taken in the course of that debate, but upon which both Lord Althorp and the Right Hon. Gentleman had expressed their opinion in 1833, he meant that portion of it which related to Ireland. He was very glad that Ireland was to be exempted from the tax. He thought it an inquisitorial, an oppressive and unjust tax, and he was very glad that one portion of the United Kingdom was to be exempt from it.—( Hear, hear.) But he could not understand why, if it was not desirable to have an Income-tax in Ireland, it was desirable to have taxes upon stamps and upon articles of consumption, and to pursue these the reverse course to that which was pur sued in England.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") Why, if these principles of taxation were right, why not apply them to Ireland as well as to England If their plan with respect to Ireland was right, why would not the plan be as good in England and in Scotland? It was said the machinery was wanting, but the Right Hon. Baronet proposed to lay a tax upon the landed property of absentees, and there must be some machinery to find out what was the income arising from that property. The returns under the Poor law Act were to be applied to that purpose, but if applied for that purpose they might also be applied to a still greater extent. It was clear, therefore, that that was not a sufficient reason for exempting Ireland from the tax. But what said the Right Hon. Gentleman ix 1833, with regard to this tax ? The Right Hon. Gentleman said "he wished to see Ireland favoured as much as possible, ,but to impose a property tax upon England and Scotland, and to exempt Ireland from its operation would be the height of injustice. ( Hear, hear, and laughter, from the Opposition.) However unpopular that opinion might be, he could not but declare that he thought it would be exceedingly unjust." Sir R. PEEL—Go on. Lord J. RUSSELL said he had not the means of doing so— he had thought that declaration sutilcient.—( Hear, hear. ) He could quite understand that what was inexpedient in 1833, might, through a change of circumstances, become expedient in 1842, but how that which was unjust in 1833 could become just in 1842, quite exceeded his comprehension. It there were passages in the Right Hon. Gentleman's speech in which having proved that the exemption would be unjust ; he proved that it would be exceedingly just, it was not in his (Lord John Russell's) power to quote those passages. One of the Right Hon. Gentlemen's col leagues had declared, that he could dress up a statement to that House— (Laughter ) and it was very possible therefore, that he had made a speech, proving both that it would he unjust, and that it would be just.—(Laughter. ) The speech of the Right Honourable Gentleman on that occasion contained the pith and substance of all the arguments which had been urged against the tax in the course of that debate, and he had felt great satisfaction in finding that his own objections were those entertained by the Honourable Gentleman in 1833. He had heard many attempts made by Honourable Members in the course of that debate to paint in dark colours the prosperity of the country and to represent her means of meeting her enemies in the most unfavourable light. These representations had naturally awakened the indignation of his Right Hen. Friend the Member for Portsmouth, and lie shared with him in that feeling. Now, let them look at those portions of the empire to which they were accustomed to look when taking a general survey of its affairs. There was the United Kingdom of Eng land, Scotland, and Ireland in a state of tranquillity. With respect to our foreign possessions, reference had been made to Canada. For some years there had been a popular Assembly existing in that country. That Assembly had made a demand which implied a total independence of this country. The con sequence was that there had been an infraction of the great constitutional principles that the revenue raised in Canada should be applied for particular and specified purposes. Those events had extended from 1822 to 1837. In the Parliament, as now c instituted, he believed a very considerable majority were well affected to the Crown and the Viritish empire. Some hints had been thrown out of the danger of war in Europe, but when did a Minister of the Crown propose a tax on such a contingency? With respect to the melancholy reverse which l.ad been experienced in India, it had been clearly shown that, viewed in a financial point of view merely, that deplorable calamity did not require the imposition of an oppressive, unjust, unequal, and inquisitorial tax upon the people of this country. Then, much was made of the state of our relations with China ; arid really one member of the Cabinet, alluding to our dangers with respect to China, spoke of the Emperor of China as if he had been the Emperor Napoleon, and as if the fleet of junks, at Canton, had been the flotilla at Boulogne. (Cries of " Hear, hear.") He had used language upon the subject, which no Minister would have ven tured to use in the face of the mighty dangers which threatened the country in 1804 and 1805. Now he (Lord J. Russell) felt no apprehension with respect to the war in China. It was a war, it should he remembered, the expenses of which were confined to the country in which it was carried on. If they had a war with any of the Powers of Europe or with the United States of America, they would find it necessary to strengthen their colonial possessions, and they would take care that there should bo no point either by sea or land, at which their interests would be endangered. But no body would apprehend that the Chinese would capture Jamaica or would attack Gibraltar, or do any of those things which the Great Powers of Europe might be expected to attempt. They had, besides, this alternative, that if the hmperor of China should refuse to conclude a treaty, and to put an end to hostilities, they might seize upon some convenient sea-port in his dominions, and carry on still their commerce with the Chinese. They might hold either Canton or Chusan, and they would then be enabled to carry on their trade more securely than they had done during past years, when their Superintendent had been in sulted and the safety of their commerce constantly en dangered by the hostility of the Government of China. But supposing that their expenses should be increased by the Chinese war half a million a-year—suppose they should have to pay the whole expenses of that war—and suppose that war should continue for some years, still that could be no excuse for the imposition of an Income-tax.—(Cheers.) He now came to the second part of the subject, on which, no doubt, they would all, hereafter, have frequent opportunities of speaking; he meant that part of the Government proposition relating fo the tariff. He had not any objection to the general prin cirees on which those alterations had been proposed. After having, as a Minister of the Crown, advised her Majesty to make that Speech with which she had opened the last Session of Parliament, in which. after stating the necessity that existed for raising the amount of the pudic re venue, her Majesty directed Parliament to consider whether revenue could not be raised in the manner least burdensome to the people, by a reconsideration of the import duties, and of the duties on corm—after having, as a Minister of the Croon, advised her Majesty to deliver that speech, he could not object to the principles on which it had been proposed to effect the present changes. But if the Honourable Gentlemen opposite had, before the dissolution of the last Parliament, made known the principles on which they intended to act— if they had last year stated the principles they intended to pursue, ho thought the proposal of those changes would not have produced the panic which he now understood existed in many parts of the country on the subject.—(Cheers.) It would have been perfectly possible for them to have stated last year, after saying that they had no confidence in the then Government, teat, with regard to the general principles on which the commerce of the country ought to be. for the future, regulated, they were of opin;on that there were many duties payable on the importation of foreign commodities which ought to be reduced to a nominal amount, and that in many instances in their opinion the prin ciple of protection had been carried to too great an extent. If they had done so, the people and the farmers of this country, who looked for plain dealing on that subject, would have understood what was- meant; and seeing that both of the great parties of this country, and that both Houses of Parliament, were agreed upon this principle, they would have have had time to consider, and would have concurred in the proposal, whether it had been from one Government or the other. But they seemed to him, even now, when they had adopted this principle, to hesitate in saying that which it seemed to him to be the only thing that could be said on the subject, and which he had always said from the first moment, that it might produce inconvenience, injury, and loss to some extent, to those interests which would be affected ; but that that loss would be repaid, and much more than repaid, by the future general prosperity of the country.— (Cheers.) But they did not do so: they were continually say ing, when speaking of the agricultural protection—there were two things which they said, and which had been said by the Right Honourable the Secretary of the Home Department—that the price of the various articles of consuinntion would be reduced, but, as had been said by the Noble Lord the Secretary of Ireland, that the producer would not find any reduction in their produce.—(Laughter.) His wish was, that if they took sound principles they ought to be prepared to avow them. With respect to many parts of the tariff, he was quite ready to support it.—(Loud cheers.) But there was one thing which he confessed required explanation. There was a heavy duty on the impor tation of foreign copper, but they did not forbid smelting ; the consequence of which was thatthey introduced into this country copper used for the purpose of smelting, and that after wards that copper was sold at a lower price in foreign countries than copper could be obtained at in this. Two years ago copper went from this country and was sold 20 per cent. cheaper than it could be purchased for their own dockyards. That was a proof of the absurdity of the law ; but if they proposed to change it, they must also abandon the argu ment they stood by in the case of sugar.—( Hear, hear.) In the present case they were favouring the mines of Cuba, mines worked by slaves.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") They refused to change when the question was between the consumers of sugar and their own slaves in the West Indies, and they abandoned it when it was between slave produced ore and the mines of Cornwall. It might be right, but let them not stand by the argument in the case of sugar. He hoped in the case of the tariff, they would not only alter some of the details, but extend the principle. All he asked was that they should act on the principles they had themselves acknowledged to be just. This was not the moment to impose an Income tax, for all classes were divided as to its principle, and were ready to propose some especial grounds of exemption or modification, while there was not that great sense of peril or necessity which would lead men to pay it without evasion, from a sense of patriotism. He was convinced other means of raising the revenue might be found, and his own propositions having been decided against, he could take no other course than to more that the Bill be read that day six months. Sir R. PEEL said, the Noble Lord had felt it incumbent on him to take the rather unusual course of resisting the first reading of the Bill, which he had brought in in conformity with the decision of that. House. The chief argument of the Noble Lord had been a personal appeal, an argumextum ad liorninem address, to himself, founded on a speech he had made in the year 1833, in which the Noble Lord said he had found his own arguments more strongly expressed. • He was glad the Noble Lori had found that consolation. But ho would address himself to the argumeat which the Noble Lord had thus derived from him against the imposition of an Income-tax at the present period. It was, of course, always important, when appeals were made to the opinion of any one in support of a proposition, to take into account the circumstances under which the opinion was delivered. He had stated, in the year 1833, his objections to the imposition of an Income-tax; but, he would ask, what was then the financial position of the country ? There was then a net surplus, according to the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, of 1,500,0001.--(Cries of " Hear, hear.") That was the estimated excess of revenue over expenditure. Lord Althorp then proposed a considerable reduction of taxes, which would lead to a loss of 1,000,0001. of revenue. But Lord Althorp calculated that there would still be a net surplus of about 516,0001. That was the financial state of the country when he ( Sir 11. Peel) had been called upon to deliver an opinion upon the subject. Proposals had been made to reduce the malt .tax, to reduce the house-tax, to reduce the window- tax, and it vise proposed to impose a property-tax by way of a com mutation for the remission of the house and window-tax. He (Sir R. Peel) had decidedly objected to the mposition a property-sax as a commutation ter the realtstax, and the house tax, and the window-tam ; and if at the present moment they had a surplus of half a million, and it were proposed to re peal the malt•tax, and the house-tax, and the window•tax, and to substitute a property .tax for those taxes, he should have no hesitation in refusing to accede to such a proposition, and voting as he had before voted, against the imposition of a pro perty-tax. The Noble Lord had alluded to what he ( Sir R. Peel) had said on the subject in 1833. Now what course had he taken in 1833? Lord Althorp had lost t he malt-tax, and Lord Al thorp had then asked him ( Sir R. Peel) what course he ought to pursue, and he (Sir R. Peel) had assured Lord Althorp that the Right Hon. Gentleman might rely upon his (S r R. Peel's) support, if, to maintain public credit, he should deem it necessary to come down to the House, and propose to rescind the vote abolishing one half of the malt-tax ; and he might say that its was mainly in consequence of the assurance he ( Sir H. Peel) bad given, that Lord Althorp bad come down to the House and proposed the strong measure of rescinding the vote of the former evening, and on that occa sion, laying aside all party considerations, he ( Sir Robert Peel) had given his support to a Ministry , to which he was politically opposed, and again •t many of those friends with whom he had been in the habit of act ng, because he was determined to maintain the credit of the country.—( Cheers.) The Noble Lord had mainly relied upon what he (Sir R. Peel) had said with regard to the pro perty•tax on that occasion. Now what was the resolution which Lord Althorp himself had proposed on that occasion, and proposed, too, in a time of peace ? His (Lord Althorp's) resolution stated that the defi ciency which would be occasioned by the reduction of the tax on malt, on hops, and on windows could only be supplied by a general tax on property and income, which it was then in expedient to propose. He had said if y ou will create a deficiency in the revenue, there is no alternative but the im position of a property-tax, and he had pledged himself, if the Minister of the day had been defeated on the malt-tax, the house-tax, and the window-tax, to assist in the imposition of an Income-tax. The Noble Lord had imposition of to his opinion respecting the propriety of the of a property-tax in Ireland. It had been proposed to him to impose a property-tax, as a commutation for other taxes. It bad, on that occasion, been proposed to relieve Eng land of the house-tax and window-tax, which would be giving England some compensating . advantage. But what compensation, he had asked, did they propose to give Ireland in compensation for an Income-tax ? One of the great objections to the property-tax was that it did not apply to Ireland, and that in proposing a tax of a tempo rar y duration, he proposed to exempt Ireland. He proposed to raise from Ireland, by a tax on spirits, an estimate amount, as near as he could calculate, equal to the amount from a property-tax. He then estimated the duty raised by assimilating the stamp duty in. England, which he thought amounted to a tax on property. He retained his opinion, although he thought that, under ordinary circum stances, Ireland ought not to be exempt, notwithstanding the opinion he expressed in 1833. He retained his opinion, that, upon the whole, he had taken a just and politic course in pro posing to raise contributions for the burdens of the country by an Income-tax.—( hear, hear.) He had not exempted Ireland, but had raised a contribution in another way. As it had been stated that he had differed in opinion, it was but fair to read that opinion which he held on the occa sion referred to, and every time he had spoken of an Income tax. The Right Hon. Gentleman then read an extract from one of his speeches in 1833, when he stated that a repeal of half the malt-tax carried with it a repeal of the whole tax, and that the only thing calculated to make up the deficiency was that which be was opposed to—a property-tax ; and that to propose that would be a - great calamity. He considered that an Income-tax was inseparable from a property-tax. This was the opinion which he held in 1833 ; admitting the inquisito rial nature of the tax, and objecting on that ground, to its being made a commutation for other taxes. But they had then a clear surplus of 1,500,0001. Ile asked whether or no the circumstances of the country were in the same position as they now are ? The Noble Lord had said that there would be a universal distaste and dislike to this tax, and therefore the Noble Lord must admit that nothing but a sense of public duty would induce any Minister to propose it. If he was to expect that the country was dissatisfied—if he was to meet with ob jections, he would ask the Noble Lord what could induce him to make such a proposition, but a conviction that he was uphold ing and maintaining the public credit ? The Noble Lord said he could are no financial necessity, and they ought not to have mentioned the disaster in India, in speaking of that necessity. He (Sir R. Peel) had been referred to the opinion of gentlemen who had some knowledge of Indian affairs. He (Sir R. Peel) thought he could produce to the Noble Lord and to the House authorities to show that the existing dis tressed state of the country had been materially affected by the state of India. But lie did not refer to them in support of the Income-tax; but he was told that he could name no public disaster, and thathe could find no political necessity, or public emergency, and he therefore had referred to Caubul and Affghanistan, and he had mentioned them in consequence of what had been said, that no public disaster had occurred. But with respect to their own position and the con dition of our finances, apart from the Indian con siderations altogether, let them consider what was the state of the deficiency of the last six years. Let them consider that it would amount to at least ten millioca, and in as time of peace. After 25 years of general peace this was the position of this country, that striking the balance of the ex penses over income, for the last six years alone, the deficit was ten millions. This, too, was not a thing of common occurrence, where the notice of it could he postponed till next year, but it was a growing and increasing deficiency. What was the amount of the present year only? it would cer tainly not be less than 2,700,0001. But he had the strongest conviction that when they came to strike the balance of expen diture over income on the sth April, 1843, putting the Indian question out of the question altogether, there would be a deficit of 3 millions—a net deficit of 3 millions, independent of India. Weil, then, he thought, under those considerations, that no one could -abject to the preposition he had made ; and that with re spect to the tariff, the reduction he had made would be for the ultimate benefit of all classes of the community. Now, he believed that throughout the manufacturing and trading parts of the community there would be an universe impression that the measure he proposed would benefit the country at large. The Noble Lord might say there ought to be great reductions made in the duty on corn, and the duty upon sugar, and other articles; but the Noble Lord should consider that the reductions which he (sir Robert Peel) proposed in the tariff would be a positive gain to the com munity. The Noble Lord would recollect, that in making those restrictions, he calculated upon a loss of 1,200,00/. for the present, and that he had a deficit of 3,000,001. to deal with for the current year, independently altogether of India. He should find some means of meeting that deficit ; and he be lieved, after all he had heard in that House, that he could not have discovered any meastve so well calculated to meet the difficulties of the country as the one he had proposed.—( Hear. ) If he had insisted on a leather -tax, or a malt-tax, and a salt tax, he knew they would have been productive, for, it had been truly said, that, if they wanted to raise millions, they must tax millions. Entertaining, however, a confident hope that the 1 1 revival of trade, and the additional consumption would enable them to relieve the country from this tax, he must again say that he thought there was a much less disturbance of the industry of the country, and of the application of capital, by imposing this tax upon the property of the country, than there would be by reviving the malt, salt, leather, and other taxes. which, after all, must be paid by those whose condition th • most wished to improve. Whatever opinions he had expressed in 1633, he had a firm conviction that he was consulting the interests and security of property more by imposing this tax upon income, than by subjecting the great mass of the working classes of the country to indirect taxation.—( Hear.) Ad mitting the evil of it, yet he had the most confident opinion that the tax was not only just in itself, considering the manner in which property had accumulated, but that, by call ing upon those who made profits in trade—by calling upon the higher classes, who had set, he must say, an example of their willingness to come forward and bear their share of the burden, he was doing that which was most consistent with the interests of trade, by whom the bulk of property was possessed, He was confident that, if Parliament would set that example, there would arise a feeling of satisfaction among the great consuming classes of the country which would amply compen sate them for the sacrifice they would make.—( Hear, hear.) Notwithstanding the expressions the Noble Lord had quoted-- notwithstanding the decided opinion which he still retained—. that if they had a surplus of 1,500,0001., to attempt to impose an Income-tax, in lieu of a window-tax or a house-tax, would be most unjust and most unwise, on account of the inquisitorial nature of the tax. Concealing none of these objections, yet the result of the inquiries he had made, and of the commu nications lie had received from various parts of the country was to confirm him in the impression which he entertained when he proposed the tax, that in a chain of difficulties the proposal which he had made was the best which he could have devised.—( Hear, hear.) They were now discussing the qut s tion at an unusual stave ; and he would conine himself to answering the Noble Lord upon the subject im mediately before the House.—( Hear, hear.) It would be inconvenient that he should then enter into any discussion upon the tariff ; but he thought he should, when the proper time arrived, be able to show that the contem plated reductions in the tariff might be made consistently with the interests of the producers as well as the consumers. He would take that opportunity of mentioning two modifications he had made in the measure, fur the purpose of removing the objec tions which had been made in the course of the discussion. One had reference to the tenants in Scotland. It had been stated, and stated very truly, that the. position of the tenant in Scotland was different from the position of the tenant in England—that the tenant in Scotland was subject to no payment on account of tithes—that the tenant in Scotland was subject to none of those payments which usually fell in England upon the occupying tenant, but which in Scotland were borne by the land. In point of fact, by theAet of 1806, a difference was made apparently, but not really in favour of the Scotch tenant. He had endeavoured to place the occupying tenant in Scotland nearly on the same footing as the occupying tenant in England. In the case of the English tenant, who occupied land tithe-free, he would be entitled to a deduction of one-eighth from the amount of his assessment, and it was clear that to that deduction the Scotch tenant was also entitled. In the case of the Eng lish tenant, who had that charge paid by the landlord, he was also entitled to the deduction ; substantial justice required that the Scotch tenant should have a deduction of one-third on this rent instead of one-half. The great objection made to this tax was its inquisitorial nature. It had been said with great force, that to subject any of the classes under Schedule D to that instuisi tion to which they were subjected by the Bill of 1806, would he unfair. He did not allude to the difference of tenure : in the case of funded property there was no difficulty, as any one with any curiosity in the affairs of others might easily ascertain the amount of another man's funded property. The same was the case with regard to land. The arrangement he proposed to make with regard to property in Schedule D was this ; —He proposed to leave the Act of 1806 as he found it— namely, to permit those who preferred going before Local Commissioners, appointed in their own neighbourhood by parties independent of the Government, to retain the power of doing so. But if any person objected to go before these local authorities, if any one said that the Commissioner appointed might be a competitor in trade, before whom a disclosure of his income might be accompanied with prejudice to his affairs, or with vexation to his. feelings, he proposed to give those parties the option of sending in their return of in come to a sworn officer of the Government, an Inspector of the Survey ; if they wished to appeal from the local authorities, he proposed to give parties the power of snaking it to that officer. He found the surcharges had been rarely made. He had attempted to prevent fraud and evasion, because to permit the existence of fraud would be unjust to the honest man. He had endeavoured to reconcile the execution of justice to all parties and the means of preventing evasion and fraud, with a remedy for those special evils which were likely to arise from the in quisitorial nature of the impost.—( Hear.) On looking at the Bill, he trusted that some portion at least (of the objections that had been urged against it would be found to have been alleviated. He believed, notwith standing the predictions of that Noble Lord as to the disgust which this tax must create, and as to the unpopularity , which must ulti mately be the lot of those who proposed it, he believed that he saw indications, throughout ‘he country generally, of the existence of a strong feeling of the necessity of maintaining public credit, and of adopting vigorous measures in order to get rid of the financial difficulties. He spoke of what he had observed a s to the feeling of the property of the country, and o f that portion of the property which was embarked in trade and manufactures; and he felt assured that there was a strong prevailing opi n i on on th e whole, that if it was necessary to raise . , 4,200,0001. to sustainpublic credit—it was more consi s t en t w ith j us ti ce atiise the sound policy to impose the buriltn on she prop er ty o f the I community than, by indirect taxation, to restrict the com fort of the great mass of the people.—(Loud cheering.) - He would not then go further into the discussion of the sub j' ct. Ile knew cot if the Noble Lord would feel it to be his duty to take the sense of the House again before the Bill went into Committee—he meant on the second reading, but he would fix as early a day as possible for the second reading, and it it should be the cpi nion of the HOLM, that, on account of the peculiar circum stances of the case, considering the season of the year, and the immense importance to the trade and manufactures of the country that the opinion of Parliament should be asked as speedily as possible respecting our future commercial regulations—if on that account it should be the opinion of the House that it would be advisable to make some temporary relaxation of those rules of the I louse—( Hear )- 11 hich confined their discussions on these subjects to two days in the week--he would not propose it, unless he felt that such was the general sense of the House of Commons; but if he should feel assured that such was the general desire of the House he would propose a temporary relaxation of those ru'ea so as to enable them to devote more than two days in the week to the consideration of the Income-tax and Tariff.—( Hear.) Mr. VILLIERS said he attached more importance to the speech which the flight Hon. Baronet had just made, than to almost any one which he had yet delivered, because he had given them a greater insight into his future views, and intentions than they had been able yet to gather. The Bight Honourable Baronet's speech had been so in geniously worded that People had been at a loss to discover what might really be his ultimate intention, ; and many persons, objecting to the details of his scheme, had yet been inclined to oppose him, because they considered the present as the commencement of a new system of taxation which would relay(' the masses of the country from the pressure of the unjust system of indirect taxation which at present prevailed. The Right Hon. Baronet's speech of that evening had dissipated all such delusions ; for the Right Hon. Baronet had said that, if it should be again proposed to substitute a property-tax, for the indirect taxes which pressed upon the masses of the people, no man would be more firm, in resisting such a change of system than himself (Sir Robert Peel). The Right Hon. Baronet distinctly admitted that all he pro posed to do by this oppressive Income-tax was to maintain public credit. They got into a fi nanc i a l dif ficulty, and they ought to consider the causes of it. This tax was merely a means of evading one of those courses. The House had been told frequently that the time was approaching when they would have to consider the effect pro duced by levying taxes on the people, not only for the support of the State, but for the benefit of particular classes, and that they would have to do sae of two things, either to tax pro perty to maintain public credit, and to diminish those monopolies which impoverished the people, and prevented them from con tributing to the taxes. It was owing to these monopolies that and trade was restricted, and that struggle which had lon g b een aenhanced, the they pricewere ( predicted between the maintenance of mono p o ly, an d th e maintenance of public credit --(Loud cheering) about li u v t ii'g to commence ". s whether they should maintain public credit by imposing fresh taxes, or by abolishing monopoly ; and those who last year held that opinion had been sneered at and taunted by Hon. Gentlemen opposite, who this year, how ever, admitted its correctness by their frequent allusions to the connexion between the cost of living and the value of income. Such were the principles which were then put forih. Had they been seriously entertained, he believed they would not have seen such a "Corn Bill as had been introduced by the Right Hon. Baronet opposite; they would not have had an Income-tax, nor so small au instalment of what was due to the country as the tariff of the Right Honourable Baronet ( Hear, hear.) He wanted to have some clear definition of the cause and character of the deficien c y under which the country was labouring. He had been told by his constituents that they had no objection to a tax upon property when the necessities of the country required that it should be imposed. They objected to the reckless manner in which the tax was to be imposed, no distinction being made between different kinds of income ; to the principle of a direct tax they did not object..—(Hear. ) But what was the cause of the deficiency ? It was not sufficient to say that it had Occurred under the late Government ; the argument was that the deficiency had occurred under the late Government, and that those who had appointed that Government should be pre pared to supply it; but that was not the view which was taken by the great body of the people.—( Hear, hear. ) They contens.ed that the Government had for many years past been in the hands of a small class ; that the Government had resided. in a minority ; but it was class legislation which had caused the deficiency, and that the Income-tax was proposed to evade one of the exigencies of that legislation. They , deceived themselves very much if they supposed that the working classes, who were intended to be conciliated by the exemption in their favour, were not alive to the real operation of a tax upon income. —(Hear, hear.) The working classes were not so ignorant as not to know that whatever injured those who employed them, must operate injuriously to their own interests; and it was now the general opinion of those classes that this tax, which was not imposed in substitution for any of which they complained, but in aggravation of all others, would add to the burdens under which they were already suffering.—( Hear, hear.) It had been proved that within the last few years, the landed interest hail been exempted from taxes to the amount of one million, and from the improvement which had taken place in landed property, there could be little doubt that if those taxes were revived a still greater amount would accrue to the revenue. No attempt, however, had been made to revive those taxes.—( Hear, hear.) There had been an attempt to prove that freehold property was in various ways taxed to an equal amount with personal property ; but it was an indisputable fact that the descent of freehold pro perty was taxed to a much less extent than the descent of per sonal property. The Right Hon. Baronet said he was not aware of any other means than an Income-tax, of supplying the vast deficiency which existed. But the Right Hon. Baronet had made the admission the other night, that by reducing the differential duties, you might improve the revenue.—( Hear, hear.) What was a differential duty ? It was a duty intended to exclude the cheaper article in favour of the dearer. —( Hear, hear.) That was the simple definition of a differential duty; and the Right Hon. Baronet hail admitted that by reducing the duty on sugar they would immediately increase the revenue. The question, then, was, should they reduce the duty upon sugar and of her articles, or impose a tax upon income ? The argument derived from the existence of slavery in the Braz.ls had been used very tenderly' is that, debate, and he believed there were now but few who thought the admission of Brazilian sugar would give encouragement, to slavery in that country. If they succeeded with regard to Brazil, could they act on it without the consent. of Cuba? It was only its the case of Brazil where there was any question about the continuance of slavery. 'I here were some w tin doubted both the security and the economy of that institution ; but in Cuba there wasno idea of abandoning it, as they profited too much by its continuance. Would not the admission of sugar grown by tree labour front the East Indies, the Phil lipine Islands, and other places, where it would be grown as cheaply as by slave labour, be a stronger inducement to aban don the system of slavery ? The same principle would apply to coffee, and from these sources a large revenue might be ob tained ; but it will be said then that there were no other means of escaping the lax. lie did not wish to underrate the im portance of the changes p ro p ose d b y the Right H on. B aronet ; but with regard to the change in the duty on timber, he did not think that reduction would be followed by so large a reduc tion of the revenue as had been anticipated. There was a great objection to bra rowing money for the purpose of supply ing a deficiency, but it was precisely in case, when they ex pected to repair their revenue, he thought they were justified in borrowing. When making a great commercial experiment. by which they might fairly expect to raise their revenue, they might resort to a loan to supply a deficiency. He could net see anything in the present state of thing thatjustified them in impes ing an Income-tax. The Right Hors. Baronet had expressly stated that he had revised many duties that had hitherto yielded no revenue, but which would never be productive. He complained of the whole scheme of the Government, because it was not calculated to meet the exigencies of the country. The people had asked for more food, more trade, and fewer taxes ; and they proposed a Corn Bill, which the Government itself could not, believe would give them more food. They asked for more trade, and ne part of the Government scheme could contribute to extend trade with the two best markets of this country, namely, the United States and the Brazils. '1 here had, of late years, been a deficiency in the revenue, because the consuming powers of the people had been diminished; but the proposed Income-tax would further curtail those consuming powers. He could not, therefore, expect that the measures of the Government would confer upon the country any real relief.—( Hear, hear.) It should be remembered that there was an immediate connexion between the price of food and the state of the revenue. Whenever the price of food was low the revenue had flourished. Could there be anything then more inconsistent, than that the Go vernment, when bringing for ward remedial measures, should not strike at the root of the r evenue , b y i mprov i ng th e means of the people, and diminishing their wants? The revenue had flourished in the years 1833; 1834, 1815, and 1836, when the price of food was low ; and the deficiency in the revenue hail increased since the price of feed had become high.—( Hear. ) 1 he Right Hon. Gentleman, after entering into various details, showing the increase in the revenue, and in the various articles of consumption, upon which a duty was paid during the years of abundance, and the proportionate decrease in the duty upon similar articles during years of scarcity, proceeded to say that it was manifest that the revenue suffered from the high prices, and the distressed condition of the people. Why, then, had not the Government, when they saw the real cause of the deficiency, applied to it its proper remedy? Why had they not introduced measures which would diminish the price of the staple articles of consumption ? The Government was now about to introduce an Income-tax ; but the country had no pros pect that they would not constantly be subjected to the burden, in order to enable the Government to meet a constant defi ciency in the revenue. They did not deal fully or fairly with the evils of the country. They had virtually admitted that monopolies had caused the deficiency in the revenue by ex hausting the means of the people, but they had not boldly abolished those monopolies. He believed that if they had come forward and proposed a truly liberal system of commercial policy, and imposed at the same time a per centage upon pro perty, if it should have been found neccessary, there was not an intelligent man in the country who would not have given them his support. He did not think, on the other hand, that the country would support an Income-tax for the support of monopoly ; and he was of opinion that the measures of the Government would not be beneficial to the country, sinless they were carried much further. Mr. HARDY wished to say a very few words on this sub ject. He would have done so en another occasion, but that he never could catch the Speaker's eye- - (Laughter.) Be hoped they Were coming to a decision on this question, after the speeches of the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Baronet. Many Hon. Gentlemen opposite had at first received with ap probation the proposition of the Right Hon. Baronet, more especially the Hon. Member for Ipswich, and the Hon. Mem ber who was smiling opposite (Mr. Wakley). He (Mr. Hardy) thought that if this tax was so unjust, so partial, so ' dishonest, and so oppressive, those Hon. Members would have discovered it--( Hear, hear) —and have resisted the measure with indignation. But when the secret meeting took place at the Reform Club, then it was that Gentlemen opposite rose one after another for the purpose of condemning this tax as unjust and inquisitorial. It had been said that this tax was une, i nal, but was not a property tax unequal ? Was it not un equal for a rich landed proprietor to pay the same as a man with a large family and a small estate? In nineteen eases out of twenty, by making a fair return, a man would escape all the inquisitorial objections to the tax. In the case of the 11,000 surcharges, made in the city of London under the old tax, only 4,000 of them appealed. The objection of being inquisitorial applied to other things.—( Hear, hear.) At Doctors' Com mons and the Registry-office, the property of almost every family in the kingdom might be ascertained ; as to its immorality and to its encouragement to fraud and per jury, it belonged to the Income-tax no more than to other Acts of Parliament; or to any proceedings between man and man, in which it was their interest to misrepresent facts to suit their own case. As to the inequality and injustice, it was impossible to avoid it. In the war the country paid ten per cent. to the Income-tax, and it was now proposed only to impose a tax of three per cent., so that there was a great difference made be tween war and peace. Besides, if war was required to justify the imposition of the tax, they' had the wars in China and Afghanistan, which were wars of considerable magnitude, however the Hon. Member for Liskeard might sneer at them. The Hight Hon. Baronet had been taunted with imposing this tax to please the landed interest. It was a pretty way to please the landed interest, to impose a heavy tax upon them, from which they could not escape. The tax was a popular one. He himself had presented an address from Rochdale, urging the Right Hon. Baronet to persever e , and he trusted that he would persevere in maintaining the honour and credit of the:country. Mr. E. RICE said after the vote which the House had come I to, it would be rather his duty to endeavour to remedy what. • he might consider the defects in the details of the Right lion. Baronet's plan, than to throw any further obstructions in the way of the measure. He preferred the measures of the late Government to the Income-tax ; but, after the rejection of those measures, he felt they hail no alternative but to accept the proposition of the Right lion. Baronet, with a view to modify its details. If he should not be enabled in Committee to obtain se ine modification of what he considered the great injustice of taxing professional incomes at the same rate as permanent incomes—if he should not succeed in that, he should feel it his duty to vote against the third reading of the Bill. One reason why he would not oppose the first reading of the Bill wae, that he thought nothing would con tribute more to the maintenance of peace thanshowing that we had ample resources to go to war. For these reasons he would not oppose the introduction of the Bill. Mr. FOX MAULE thought his Hon. Friend, who had last spoke, must have misundersood what had fallen from the Right. lion. Baronet, on the subject of the modifications of his plan, without the introduction of which his Hon. Friend had stated he should feel it to be his duty to vote against the third reading of the Bill. The Hight Honourable Baronet had distinctly stated that he would consent to the introduction of no such modification as that which had been proposed by his Hon. Friend, and he would therefore urge his Ilan. Friend net to wait for the third reading of the Bill, but to vote against it at. once. lie was anxious, before giving his vote on the present occasion to state to the House his rea • sons for so doing, because he had been much misrepresented on the subject of the Income-tax. It had been stated to that Eloitee, that in voting with the Ministers for the postponement of the decision upon the Right Hon. Baronet's resolutions until after Easter, he had followed a course founded solely and simply on factious opposition. He would appeal to the Eight lion. Gentleman whether he had not stated distinctly, when the reso lutions were brought before the House, he considered sufficient time had not hien given to the people of this country to consi der their nature gild operation. He stated distinctly, that in voting with the minority his object was to gain time for the people of Scotland to consider those resolutions, and when taxed by the Hon. Member for Lincolnshire with voting for delay, he did so agreeably with the opinions and wishes of his constitu ents.—(lfear, hear. ) Now the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secre tary for the Home Department, had stated that he (Mr. Fox Maule) having sounded his constituents as to the propriety of holding a meeting to discuss these resolutions, he had been in formed that if a meeting were held those resolutions would re ceive its approval. It appeared that the only source from which the Right Honourable Baronet had derived his information was an anonymous letter, so greatly had he been at a loss for matter for his speech. He (Mr. F. Simile) begged now to state dis tinctly that all he hail lenrned from his constituents was, that his constituents did not disapprove of his voting with the minority before Easter ; and the Right Hon. Baronet having asked him what they thought of the proposed measure, he begged in state explicitly that those merchants and shopkeepers, whose incomes would be affecied, entirely disapproved of it.— ( Hear. hear.) They complained of the tax both on account of its injustice and its inquisitorial character. Not one of those with whom he had conversed had one word to say in favour of the Income-tax. He was quite ready to admit to the Right Hon. Baronet, that in the town of Perth there were persons whom the Right Honourable Baronet had captivated by his measures, and upon whose approbation he was trusting t.o a very considerable extent. But he (Mr. F. Maule) would tell him that the day may come when he would find that the class in whom he had trusted for support of those measures, may have their eyes opened. He would tell the Right Hon. Baronet that the day had been when the agricul tural interest had confided in him for the entire protection of their interest', and who were so confident in the protection of t the Hight Hon. Baronet at this moment. lie would not use the hatsh word which had been objected to in the course of the de bate, but he would say that the Right Hon. Baronet had dis appointed the expectations of the agriculturists, and he would say that the country had, from one end to the other, expressed disappointment at the manner in which they had been treated, and the measures which had been brought forward. He would warn the Right Hon. Baronet that, although he may receive much inconvenience from the result of that discovery on the part of the agriculturists, it was nothing to the inconve nience which he and the country would receive when the great mass of the people discovered the effect of the opposition to the Income-tax, coupled with the assertion that they would not be affected by it—when they should discover that such was the case, the reaction which would ensue would be dangerous, not simply to the Right Hen. Baronet's Government, for that, perhals, would not concern him (Mr. F. Maule) so much.— ( Laughter.) But he would tell him, it would be dangerous to the peace of the country. It was impossible to inflict an Income tax without in a very great degree affecting the working classes. It had already been acknowledged by the lion. Mem ber fur Knaresborough, that many manufacturers were lessen ing their amount of labour, in anticipation of the income-tax. He would ask why they invited that great body of the people to consider the Income-tax, they who opposed useful measures, such as the Corn-law and the Sugar Duties ?—( Hear, hear.) Why that they may get a blow struck at the middle classes, who, they imagine, stand between them and obtaining univer sal suffrage. When they have effected that which the Govern ment, by the imposition of the Income-tax, was assisting them to do, they would find a class combined, the union of which would entirely depend on the measure passing. He thanked his Noble Friend for giving lion the opportunity of giving his vote against this tax. His Noble Friend had been accused of taking an unusual course, but the occasion also was unusual. They were saddling the country with a tax, of which some opinions had been read of the recorded debates of that House, and to which he should again take the liberty of referring. In the words of the Right Hon. Gentleman, it is a tax which, " if properly collected, would expose every man's besiness to a ri gorous inquisition ; it is a tax which would encourage immo rality, fraud, and perjury.—( Hear, hear, hear.) It would discourage industry, which, in a country like this, no tax ought to do." Such were the words of the Right lion. Baronet, and such was his simple opinion of the tax, which he should oppose whenever he had the opportunity of so doing. The Right Hon. Baronet had said that his plan was supported by the commercial community—he had heard, indeed, that it had met with the support of the Chamber of Commerce of Glasgow, and he had heard it with some surprise, because the same body had placed on their records a resolu tion preferring the fixed duty on corn, of his Noble Friend, to the sliding scale. But this Chamber of Commerce, it ap peared, was solely goverved by six Directors, and in point of tact it was the approval of these six only which the lion. Ba ronet hail received. These Directors, too, would be found to be men interested in the continuance of the West India mu nopcly, and the maintenance of the sugar duties, t.o the extent at which they at present existed. On the other side, the Chamber of Edinburgh had declared against it. Ile should cheerfully give his vote against the measure. Mr. MONCKTON MILNES imagined that the Right Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down was the only Member of the House who was not convinced by the Right Honourable Baronet's defence of his consistency against the charge of the Noble Lord. Tee measure was riot so much the measure of the Right Hon. Baronet as the Measure of the necessity of the times. lie was sorry to see so much party spirit exhibited on the other side in discussing this quest on. He did not approve of the practice of alluding to former debates, and of raking up old speeches—(Opposition cheers)—and it was a practice which lie hoped every young member would endeavour to put a stop to.—( A laugh.) He thought that, except in case of necessity, such a tax as the present ought not to be imposed ; but he thought, although the necessity existed in the present instance, it was merely a financial necessity. There had not been one word fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet which could raise a feeling of despondency in the minis of any one. The budget of the late Government had been rejected by so large a majority that it wouid be impossible to carry it. They had ' lett many good intentions as a legacy to their successors, but they had left them no money, and hence the deficiency, hence the neces By for imposing an Income-tax, to make good that deficiency. Surely the army beyond the Indus was a British army, and the navy in the China Seas was a British navy, anti entitled to the support of the House ? He lipped the question of Affghanistan would not be discussed in the House of Commons, because he believed if the late Government, in their own defence, "hould be compelled to lay before the House all the reasons which had influenced them to undertake the war in Affghanistan, he feared that the disclosures which they might he compelled in self-defence to make might seriously complicate our relations with some of the Powers with which we were now allied. What were our relations with France and with America? He for one could not but regret the treaty of the 15th of July, 1840, the consequences of which he believed were more serious than was commonly supposed. The suspicions and jealousies of the people of France towards the people of this country were the deplorable fruits of that treaty. There was one part of this measure which he earnestly desired to see modified. The Right lion. Baronet had given an exemption to the working classes of this country. He thought there should be some consi deration for the labour of the head, as well as the labour of the hand, and that incomes derived from trades and profes sions should net be subjected to the same tax as landed pro perty.—( Hear, hear.) Some reduction from the three per cent., in favour of incomes subject to risk, and derived from intense labour, would be hailed by the country with the greatest satisfaction. In conclusion, he must say, that he anticipated a period when the deficiency would be removed, and the couns try relieved entirely from this now necessary burden. Mr. RAIKES CURRIE said, ho considered the measure proposed by the Government as at once bold, honest, and comprehensive—required by the exigencies of the times, and, as far as he could see, not more objectionable than any sub stitute which could be proposed. It was hold on account of its inquisitorial character, and because it was likely to excite the opposition of the middle classes; but, as he believed it to be honest—honest, because in this measure they proceeded to tax themselves, and not the working classes, he was pre pared to bear any odium which might arise from its in quisitorial character.—( Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) It was a comprehensive measure, because in the tariff there was an attempt to invigorate and expand trade, the source of all revenue—therefore he thought it was a comprehensive mea sure. It had been attempted by miserable expedients to ward off the evil day with respect to the finances of the country.— ( Loud cheers.) He must say that this had been the case for years past. Ile felt grave apprehensions with respect to the termination of the oriental war. Looking to the state of Europe he thought that a fell Exchequer and a well-manned fleet was the best guarantee for peace. It had been proposed to tax heritable property, but they must consider what was the object of the tax, and they must consider their present emer gency. When lion. Members asked him if he could look with his free trade principles at the money resourses in the country, and then vote for the Income-tax, he answered that the Whigs had prevented them, by their course of legislation, the means of obtaining these beneficial enact ments.--( Cries of „ Hear, hear.") They ought to have '.ad a different system of representation, but the Noble Lord, the Member for London, had said that he would hear of no alte ratiou in the Reform Bill ; he declared it to be a final measure. A friend of the Noble Lord's had said that he would in five mi mites take the command of the Channel Fleet, or build St. Pe ter's.--(Loud laughter.) But the Noble Lord had undertaken a much greater task, for he attempted to erect the temple of free trade on the tomb-stone of monopoly. He (Mr. Currie) wished to live and die under the existing institutions, but he wished to see justice done to the people. A great class had sprung up, in consequence of the Noble Lord shutting the door of the constitutions of the mass of the people, and hence had sprung up the agitation for universal suffrage. The Right Honourable Gentleman opposite had been most unjustly ac• cased. That Right Hon. Gentleman had declared that he would never bring for ward other men's measures. He ( Mr. C.) hoped to see in that a better system. He (Mr. C.) felt that they must unfetter trade. The day was over for monopoly he hoped, and if free trade were not adopted, it would be taken arid supported by the wreck of all our institutions. To use the words of the Right Hon. Gentleman, he could not be the dupe of the so phistries of his followers ; he could not be cheated by the bug bear of men of dependency lie must think that dependency was the hand-maid ol'commerce, and the preservative of pollee. The Right Hon. Baronet was an able Minister, and a states man experienced in debate, perhaps unrivalled—a man whose name would live when they were forgotten—when his (Mr. Currie's), and many lion. Gentlemen around, would be buried in oblivion. Would he, then not use his master-spirit, and rise, like a god, to do justice to the country ? Would he not look down, from that dizzy height on which he was placed, and, like the men of old, confer blessings on a suffering nation. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that if one half of the compli ments he had just heard paid to the Right Hon. Baronet oppo site were true, every one in that House, and every one out of it, who read those compliments, must be perfectly satisfied that the nation was, at the present moment, the most favoured nation of the earth—(Laughter and cheers)—and that we had arrived at the political millenium; and they ought to be pleased to hear that the affairs of the country were to be regulated by the Right Hon. Baronet—that our forces were paid by the Right Hon. Menber for Kent—when they saw that the magis t ates of England were appointed by the Right Hon. Baronet, the Home Secretary, the Member for the great and independent constituency of Dorchester.—( Cheers.) These were events , that, according to the Hon. Gentleman whohad just sat down, ought to be worshipped. Sorry should he (Mr. Duncombe) bo to prevent the Hon. Member who heel just spoken living and dying under any institution he thought proper. lie said he hoped he should live and die under the existing institutions. lie ( Mr. Duncombe) hoped he might, but he hoped he might live long, and that the day of his death might be long ' removed, but he trusted it would not take place un der that Goverment that now oppressed the country.—( Loud laughter.) With regard to the eulogy the Honourable Gentleman had paid her Majesty's Government, he (Mr. Currie) admitted that the measures were comprehensive, bold, and honest. He (51r. Duncombe) admitted they were corn prehensive, for he believed they were measures that would bring down universal distress and every sort of havoc on the century.—(Cheers and laughter.) NI hen the Hon. Gentle man said it, was an honest measure, he (Mr. Duncombe) differed with him. He denied that it was a bold measure. —he denied that it was an honest measure. The Hon. Member for Pomfret said nothing but a strong Govern ment could have proposed such a measure, so Obnoxioue, so disgusting—(Cheers and laughter) —to the people of this country. But how were they strung? why, in numbers. Were they strong in public confidence.—( Cheers, and counter cheers.) lie denied it. He denied that the measures were. The Right Honourable Baronet was supported by Gentlemen who would support e very injustice to keep the Right Eon. Baronet in office The Hun. Member for Porn feet said he should like to see a dissolution —so should lie (Mr. Duncombe). lie would like to see that; but the Right Hon. Baronet was too good a judge. That juggle which has been going on ihreuah the debates, did not prove that the working classes wouldbe benefited by the measures of the Government. The Right Hon. Baronet seemed to say, that while he took money from one pocket of the people, he crammed into the other beef, mutton, and other provisions.—(Laughter. ) But up rose some greesy farmer, and when he complained of the injury to be inflicted on his interest, the Right Hon. Baronet told him that he was mistaken, and that neither foreign meats, nor any other articles of foreign produce would find their nay under his new legislation into this country. The measures of the Government would not really benefit the working classes. Let them look to the case of the boat and shoe-makers, or the case of the cork-cutters. There could be no doubt that the contemplated changes would prove most detrimental to the interests of these classes ; but while they were de prived of their protection, the protection to the landowner was continued almost in its former state. He believed that the cork-cutters, in particular, would most severely suffer from the operation of the new tariff ; and yet that was a class which de served every consideration from the House. It was their boast that not one of their body was supported at the expense of the parish. Again, he believed, that the change in the duty upon foreign boots and shoes would throw 30,000 individuals engaged in that trade in this country into the workhouse. The straw-bonnet makers would equally be sufferers; and he de fied the Right Hon. Baronet to show that his contemplated alterations would benefit the working classes generally. Yet the Income-tax was the price at which those changes were to be purchased. He did not think that tax would be long borne by the country.—(Hear.) The measure was not an honest—the measure was not a bold measure. He would ask why they did not extend it to Ireland ? Ireland had been benefited as much as England by one of the great sources of the deficiency in the revenue—he meant the reduction in the Post-office. If the measure were good for England it would be good for Ireland ; and it should be extended to both coun tries. The Income-tax had formerly operated most oppres sively. It was well-known that there had been 11,000 sur charges at the time in the city of London alone, and out of these alleged surcharges 3,000 wore reversed, 1,000 were con firmed; and the 7,000 remaining traders in the City thought it advisable to submit quietly to the injustice which they com plained of. 'I hat was a striking proof of the iniquitous way in which the tax had operated, and in which he believed it would still operate. He admitted that there was an apathy in the country as to what was done in that House upon the subject; but the reason of that was that the people were indifferent to what passed in Parliament, be cause they knew that that House did not represent their in terests. He (Mr. Duncombe) bad, however, met no man outside the walls of that House favourable to the measure. The proposed tax would tend to limit and restrict the franchise in boroughs. It would render the restration more difficult. It would enable the Government to control the honourable elector, and he (Mr. Duncombe) took it for granted that the new tax collectors would act perfectly in coneert with the 364 new Ma gistrates appointed by the Government. The tax might no passed in that House ; but he felt persuaded the country would soon be tired of the measure, and he was happy to say that to the last he had opposed it. Mr. ROEBUCK, who spoke in a very indistinct tone, was understood to commence by complaining of the manner in which lion. Members, who differed from their patty upon any great question of policy, were stigmatised in that House. There were certain leaders whom it seemed to be thought humble in dividuals like himself should follow upon all occasions ; and when they differed from those bright lights it was necessary they should state why they had followed their own small candle. He wished to address the House on that occasion, because he found that what had fallen from him on the subject under dis cussion hail been subjected to much criticism. lie was glad he had at least one defender that night on the same side of the House, who had spoken of the proposal of the Government as a straightforward, a bold, and a comprehensive measure. He would thus have the eloquent defence of his Hon. Ft ieml the Member for Northampton (Mr. R. Currie) to fall hack upon, if he should himself be wholly unable to say anything in his own defence.—( Hear, hear.) lie proposed to take a view of the measures proposed on both sides of the House ; and if it appeared that the remedy proposed by the Right Hen. Baronet was the most complete, he would have justified the course lie should take. First, let him consider the points in which the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Baronet agreed. It was ac knowledged by the Noble Lord that there was a great defi ciency—the amount of that deficiency had been allowed by all. The Noble Lori had also showed that that deficiency ought to be made up, and tha the current expenses of the year should be provided for. So far the Noble Lord and the Right lion. Baronet were agreed. Both agreed in stating, however, that the deficiency must be met by payment, and there he &tiered from them. Ile contended that it was a reduc tion of the expenditttre, and not by the imposition of new taxes that the difficulty was to be met. The constitu encies had no right to complain of that proposition ; having elected the Right lion. Baronet the burden imposed fell justly upon them. It was the unrepresented classes who had alone a right to complain of any measure which the Government might propose. The unrepresented had just cause for indigne hen. Vliat, then, were the means proposed to meet the de ficit? Before he came to that point, he begged to deprecate a practice which prevailed, of quoting Hansard to show ee which side the fault lay; each party trying to prove that the other had caused the mischief, and each \CIS now engaged hi recriminating the opposite party.—( Hear, hear.) Well, the evil being admitted, how was it to be met? The Right lion. Baronet said he must raise two or three millions each year to cover the expenses of the year, and ho said he could not do that by means of the tariff.—( Hear.) He (Mr. Roebuck) had observed that the Noble Lord on that side of the House had never asserted that the deficiency would be supplied by the ineans which he proposed. The Noble Lord approved of the amendments proposed in the tariff by the Right Hon, Baronet. Besides this, he proposed a fixed duty upon coin, not so much to raise revenue as to regulate the duty. Both the Right Hon. 11 ironet and the Noble Lord opposite agreed in the necessity of affording protection to corn; there he was at issue with both. As regards protection to the landed interest, and as regards the tariff, both, then, were agreed. Before he dismissed that part of the topic he could not help noticing the fact that the Noble Lord, whilst he had proposed a reduction of the duty on sugar, had never proposed to admit foreign provisions. He rejoiced that they had a Minister bold enough to make such a proposal, and poser enough, spite of the opposition behind him, to carry it into effect.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Now, the Right Hon. Baronet proposed, by a direct tax, to supply the deficiency, which the Noble Lord had not intended to supply. It had been said that they might gain some money front lowering the different articles, but it had never been shown that the whole amount would be raised. A great deal had been said about defalcation. Now, he thought that the only ques tion which the Legislature ought to ask itself, in considering that question, was this, Whether the people could annually re produce as much as was taken from them ? There could be no legerdemain used to produce this effect; but, supposing any fiscal instrument could be devised for the attainment of that end, would the Noble Lord vote for it ? He answered, no ! He who was for protection for agriculture, who must have an M. duty, was not the man for a thorough reformation of the fiscal regulation' of the country, that would give the people the full benefit of their own industry. lie, therefore, judged that with the House, as at present formed, he could not expect a total ' repeal of the Corn-laws. That was the mainspring of ail al terations. Unless they could reduce the price of that article they did nothing ; and what the people desired in this respect, this House would not effect. It had been opposed by the Noble Lord, as well as by the Gentlemen opposite. The people had failed in this great object. He was there to do his best under the circumstances, and how could he do it ? By leaving the finances of the country in that uncertain and irregular state in which they would have been left, if the propositions of the Noble Lord had been carried ? Or, on the other hand, with a full knowledge of the difficulties, was he to take the means offered for getting out of them—means painful, if they liked, but not so painful as many of the exag gerations of the effects of the law might lead them to suppose. was he to vote for the Noble Lord, and leave the finances of the country in a state in which no wise statesatan, in which no man of probity, of courage, or of honour, would leave them e___.(etheers from the Tory benches.) It was not enough to come to him and say lie believed they might do something good— every man must make a sacrifice. lie woo not to be told of the inquisitorial nature of the tax; that was the cry, the cuckoo note or the present day, rung in the ears of every man who thought with him on the question. When the people looked the danger in the face, and came to a clear perception of the state of things, he be lieved all this talk of the inquisitorial nature of the tax, would fade before actual experience.—( Hear, hear.) And, it it did not, was it not their duty to act according to what they thought right, and give the people time to come to a sound opinion, He was not to be frightened by the bugbear of the inquisitorial nature of the tax. Then there was some idle talk of this being only a war tax. What was the meaning of a war tax ? He supposed it was one, the proceeds of which were only to be spent in war, it making no difference whether that war was in India or Europe. He would ask those Gentleman who had got up this business in Afghanistan whether there was not an expensive war there ? Was there not an expensive war in China ? It was a war that must be paid for, and must be paid for by a tax; it would, there fore, be a war tax.—(Hear, hear.) They talked of this being a peculiar reserve in time of need—was not this a time of need ? Had they not been going on for the last ten years like spenthrifts were not they ashamed to look the public creditor in the face? And was it not necessary that we should make up our annual it directly over the counter?—(Hear` hear.) htgoo a n y shuffiing, and producing paltry and p e tt y ir) Texhpeyeti might g and pay plans of e xpediency, but it was money they must have, and it was the people who must supply it. If they did not like the mode they took of supplying it, the remedy was in their own hands. If the constituencies complained, they had nothing to do but to turn out every man who had voted, not for the tax, but for keeping up the expenditure. That would be a sweeping mode of clearing the House, very few would escape that besom of destruction.— (Hear, hear.) The advantage of this tax was that the people would know what they had to pay, while it would take the least out of their pockets. It would test the value of men's opinions, and prove whether men were acting from national, personal, or party views. Those who acted from national views should brave present displeasure ; those who acted from personal views would be swayed by personal considerations; while those who acted from party would merely follow their leader. He might be wrong in his notions of political economy, but having balanced the two propositions, he must vote for that of the Right Hon. Baronet, in the hope that he might hereafter persuade the night Hon. Gen tleman to alter that part of the plan which was really unjust —that which seeks to impose an Income-tax.—(" Oh, oh.") Against that in Committee, he should distinctly vote.—(Hear, hear.) He be lieved there were means of rendering the tax equal to all. A tax on property, without a tax on income, would be unjust, but a tax that should press equally on income and on property would not be fair. In Committee, therefore, he should use e ver y means ofin ducing the Right Hon. Baronet to alter that portion of the tax. He believed that the exigency of the time required the tax, and he was prepared to vote for the Right Hon. Baronet. He believed that he alone of the two statesmen who had put forward their plane, L had really brought forward a plan equal to the exigencies before L them—who fairly met the difficulty in the face —who had stated I it in the extent to which it ought to be exhibited, and who had met it without circumlocution. There plight be cases of error, but he believed he had honestly put it fort without indulging in shuffling expedients—(Hear, hear—ard o far he was more worthy of the confidence of the people than the e • who were now opposed to them.—(Cheer.) Mr. 'WALLACE had heard the speech of the Hon. Nerrib T Bath without surprise; though the Hon. Gentleman was izaci% a to possess great logical powers, yet it was the most illog:cal sp he had ever heard. He denied that it was at all applicahle et' case they were handling. He contended that the Hon. Mew lat knew nothing about it.—(Laughter.) The Hon, Member Finsbury had described how the affairs of individuals avould. exposed, and the country would never submit to it ; if they did, they were not Englishmen, and neither Irish-. t.lr Scotch—(Hear, hear)—or, if he were Irish, he would be the .0L noodle the country ever produced. Some Irish Members on I' other side of the House had approved of the tax, and the Right E Gentleman ought to put it on Ireland. If he did not, he (Mr_ eV.) should propose that Scotland be exempted.--(" Oh, nil,'" laughter.) He was convinced that no plan would secure were and he should give his vote against it with the greatest ,deasvre. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD rose amid loud crie " Divide." He should not have trespassed on the attenti , D o e House, but for a matter which called for explanation. 3t li been stated that a memorial had been agreed to at ft 'C' , " dale in favour of the plan of the Right Honour. Baronet. He disputed that memorial as representing general opinion of the borough. A public meeting I ,•• been called in the borough, at whist) it had been 0gre... , i1 withou % disscntirlit voice, that the Income-tax ought to be oppcsed. F -C whatever might be the opinion of the people of Rochdale, he •1 not so far depart from his own opinion as to vote fur the pt position. 11, could not cvnsent to impose a tax so oppressil c the community, and should feel it his duty to vote against it. Mr. COBDEN did not oppose the Inc nue.tax as the Inc )1 •.10,... tax, but as he would oppose any tax in the preset'''. en cornstt trciA of the country. He contended that rigid economy should b traduced into eve' y department of the Government, and bin would not, because lie was in a minority upon that i o'n',. follow the example of the Honourable 11e.mber fir I It and swell th,t majority which was already too Is. - Se. In the I " " place, lie approved of it, because the country was' already in ri taxes to indi v id ua l s, which, if repeated, wou ld yieki an atouni..la revenue to the st a t e, an d h e coul d not consent to the impositicre new taxes until a ll monopolies wereabolished. I n b r in, •ting forays it ,uP the question of the Corn-laws, the Right Hon. Baronet denied th the distresses of the country were caused by any restric tious n 1,4 a trade; but, in bringing forward his budget, and Lis grand k•Tctcra " and commerce were the c auses o f t h e d i stress of tariff ref dm, he certainly discovered that the restrictions • us%tat .0 , the counti ; the Noble Lord, the Memb er f or S out h Lancashire, who far tlia C't giving them a hearing years had opposed even when th ' ' complained of restrictions, now, all at once turned' Jour d , a ' I said that it would be criminal to delay passing the- C rrlea sot ea even for an hour. For the last th ree years the man "%et' world had been expressing their opinion as to the remeo evils under which they had been suffering, and they all t one remedy—the abolition of the Corn and Provision law " yet the Right lion. Baronet omitted, from his tariff, the r ,os t portaut of all articles of commerce—corm—(Lond cheers, . ixad crier of " Question, question.") was the question. The t A ri ff and , the Income.tax were so mixed up together, that they con l a •. not b., considered separately. lie had likewise excludes', the ext most important article of consumption—sugar. Some false ide.'s o ' l this subject might naturally be expected to exis , ; °tit of doors, when they found even the Honourable Mc ,tuber for Bath expressing a doubt whether any alteration in the so gar dutic% would conduce to the comfort of the people. Mr. ROEBUCK rose amidst loud cries of " Ord: He rose to order, he begged to disclaim the expressions him by the Hon. Gentleman. order." xnputod to Mr. COBDEN would only make one further remarl t. upon the subject, which was, that they could at this moment get t co casks of Cuba or Brazilian sugar, in bond, for the same quantity of mantra factures which they were obliged to give to Jamaica 1 nonopolista for one cask, and Mr. M'Grcgor had said, that if t hey would. equalise the sugar duties they would add three millions sterlingr to the revenue. He admitted that the alteration, as to the is nportatimr of live cattle, was important as conceding a principle, .but there could never he any great traffic in live cattle, and cc nsequentir never any great exportation of goods in exchange for t Item, amt this could not be accepted as any compensation for an hi come-tax a because any duty paid upon live cattle would be an addit ion to the revenue. With regard to the alteration of the timber duties, hen thought that was a useless sacrifice of revenue. There were thirty thousand empty houses in the neighbourho, id of Man chester alone; there were more ships lying in mile ary that" ever had been known, and that was the time chosen to make this alteration. There was no reduction in the duties on sheese •cas butter, and with regard to the duties on salt meat ii doubtel much whether the people of this country would even consume much salt meat with advantage to their health. TI e present duty on salt meat was 12s. per cwt., and there was no consump. tion, and it was not likely consumption would be increas ad by re during the duty to Ss. The duty on cotton remained ui ireducece A great deal had hems done in trifles; but all the grey t articles had been passed over, and this was the compensation the t were to receive fur an Ineeme.tax. The Right Hon. Bate net gave them cheap timber when it was not wanted. He gave them a free trade in cattle when the people were reduced to a pa tato diet, and wanted bread—(Cheers)—and he admitted French I roots and shoes, and gloves, to compete v ith the produce of the half-t mployed artisans of this country, while at the same time they ref. ,ed to let them touch one grain of Normandy wheat.—(Loud the srs.) It was a crying injustice in the guise of free trade. It was beginning at the wrong end. It was calculated to Oast an odium on the character of free trade, and as a free trailer he pro. tested against it. He hoped, however, it would rouse the s uffering interest to demand, as they might to do, a free trade in • :he first necessary of iile.—(Loud cheering.) He disclaimed on ;he part of the free trade's any responsibility for the Income-iax. It was not necessary to carry out the principles of free trade, all I he re pudiated as fraudulent all such pretences.—(Loud cheers. ) Th 3 articles In which they wanted a free trade were those articl. s paid no revenue to the State, but which, instead, paid a t evenuo to individuals, who put their hands in the pocket of the people, without rendering the State any service whatever. A fro r trade in corn and sugar would be more important than all th, r Right Hon. Baronet proposed to de.—(Cheers.) lie knew he shc uld lee told of the petition which had been presented from Man: !rester, in favour of the Government measure. He was glad to la rar the lion. Gentlemen opposite were inclined to pay so much att notion to petitions from Manchester. For the last three years pct '.tiers, signed by 60,000 persons had been presented from Manct ester, for a repeal of the Corn.laws, but no attention had been r aid to them. The petition in favour of the Government measure w is the offspring of a blind spirit of partisanship. ( Sear, hear) and he was sot ry and ashamed to say that the first parties in promoting that petition were the clergy r tee Establishment.—(Hear, hear. ) Those Gentlemen who so I rudly proclaimed that they never interfered its party politics, now they saw the Corn Bill safe, carte forward as a party body to supp, Sri a party Government, and so rash arid indiscreet hail they bet it in their spirit cf partisanship, that they hod actually petitioned fo : the tariff as it had originally been laid oil the table of the House wit heat waiting to see what alterations were to be proposed—they had actually petitioned for the unametaled tariff; errors of the press and all, aid would have to petition afresh in favour of the amended me. Hen. Gentlemen need not be impatient ;he was going to sit dc •wn, but he knew what he was saying was very unpalatable; still I her thought that as the representative of a community like the desol steel population of Stockport, he had not been wrong in pressing t• emir sufferings upon the House. When these measures were brot. ght forward as a panacea to the distress of the people, ho consideres ha had a right to express his opinion. He was bound to tell them t has they were entirely deluded ;he was bound to tell them that CI le: , would not find a revival of trade which would give them an opp ass.. tunity of removing the Income-tax. 1 hey had delayed it too foe ;. Ile questioned whether any remedy of any kind would be in tie e s During the first six months of last year there had been a mduetair in its the wages of Lancashire alone, which might be equalled to fi 7e millions sterling. Let them think of this out cf the trade a, id the Exchequer of the country.—(Hear, hear.) This was t, ae case through all the counties, and especially the midland couuta !s. —(Hear.) How then could the country be prosperous, as stat gel by the Right Honourable Baronet, when the revenue depended m the prosperity of the working classes ? He could only look at the proposal of taxation as the symptom of the State disease t, so years ago. The Right Honourable Baronet, with figures and st a tistics, attempted to prove that we were not in a state of sufi'eriis But now lie came and proposed an Income-tax. He (Mr. Cobden told them that if they did not go further they would he disap pointed. They had now the remedy in their own hands to relies e the commerce of the country. Give the people of Englan• I fair scope for their industry, and they might have prosperity yet ; and if they did not, then he warned them of the consequences. They had worked out the bees, and now they were beginning on , the honeycomb, and how tang would that last? He said that the remedy they applied was not sufficient. They knew that when Arkwright was inventing his machinery and extending his im provements, when complaints were made to hint of the state . of the country and the expenses, he said, Never mind, I will pay the expenses of the country. And so it had baen the cotton trade that enabled them to pay the accumulated debt of that war—that trade that was au much despised in that House. if they destroyed that trade, they would have a terrible re-action, that would come heavily upon them, and upon this they had the testimony of David Hume, who said it would be sooner titan they believed. Mr. MU NTZ said that he entirely agreed with the Hon. Mem- • tier who had just sat down, that the proposed measures would not relieve the distressed state of the country. But he did not sec that was any reason why they should not have a property-tax. He had as much objection to an Income-tax as any man In the world; but as the Right Hon. Baronet would not propose a property-tax without an income-tax he (Mr. Mentz) would rattier have them to gether than no property-tax at all.—(Hear, hear.) His object was to lay the burdens upon the law-makers, which was the best means of making the laws good. An lion. Gentleman had said that the votes were given to party, His (Mr. Muntz's) vote was cot a party vote. He never was a man to vote for party. He in tended to vote for the motion of the Right Honourable Baronet, because he considered it to be to the interest of the people at large ; not to the interest of his supporters, perhaps, but that was no con sideration with him.—( Laughter.) If his vote did not pletoe his constituents they knew what to do.—(Renewed laughter.) His object was to lay the burden of the taxation on those who were competent to bear it, and who were the framers and directors of the law. Now his objection to an Income.tax—(Loud laughter)—he did not know that what he was going to say would call forth a laugh—he had said before that ha objected to an Income-tax, and. he was going to state his reasons why. He thought it was exceedingly inquisitorial, and would fall exceedingly heavy on tradesman who, in times like these, dared not make their affairs known to the public, and who were obliged to make a return of profits they never realised. lie well remembered the last severs years of the last Income-tax. It was at a time when he was in active life, and largely concerned in business, but he did not think this was a sufficient reason for his objection to a property-tax. If he had believed that the proposal of the farmer Government would have rendered the Income-tax unnecessary, he should have felt bound to have voted against the measure. He did not believe that the measures of the late Government would have realised their expectations. As he said before, he wished to see the bur dens of the country put upon the law-maker. He did not be. liove the measure now proposed would relieve the distresses of the people.—(Loud laughter.) His only object in rising was to jus_ tify the vote he intended to give.—(Laughter.) lie had not the slightest objection to Hon. Gentlemen laughing, lie had nothing further to say.—(Laughter and cheers.) After a few words from Mr. RUNDALL, Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when the numbers were -188 For the Amendment ........... Against the Amendment . 285 Majority against the Amendment —97 ee i s l . l S. 6 The Bill was then read a first time, and was ord ered to be read a second time on Friday next. The House then resolve d itself into a Co mmittee of Supply, Mr. Gaveve in the ch air. 1 4, 0 2 ,0 5 0 3, 0 ) . . I .a . s w s a y s ted vot f ed or civil contingenc i es. Exchequerontin Bills. 60,0001. c Th e resolutions were reported, the Ho use res u med, and the ( 1 00 Chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again. The House then went into Committee on the Municipal Cor . porations Bill. Mr. LEADER objected to the Bill, and said that unless it were materially altered in the second reading he should feel it his duty to appose it. I t %fi d e b A e e T n T t Oh the o lC p . E m . ; in G o E f li th E e lt le A ga L l o s ffi ta c ted ers, th b e ot o h b the late Governm en t , as we ll as o f severa l l awyers i n Westminster J o e ; ttsheopfresthoeaßci!idl. Hall, that parties holding leases of Corporation lands, were eligible to serve as Town.councillors. On this opinion the public had acted in full confidence till the Bridgenorth case, in which a contrary de. vision was given. The object of his Bill was merely toprevent action s going on, which under the circumstances he had stated might be brought to the extent of many hundreds, and to assure the public that the evils incurred from acting on what turned out not to be law, should be cured by Act of Parliament. It would secure those who had been already elected in the enjoy ment of their offices. The Bill was short and confined. If it should be considered the Bill would be defective without the introduction of clauses to prevent the entering into contracts by Town-councillors for the disposal of these leases, which might open a door to jobbing, he would be glad to concur in them, and 9 5 jo i c-Obe ;e Par Gll , °: