The Sun. — London, England, 1861-03-09 00:00:00

IMP'LRIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS -7-(YESTERDAY.) T.he LoRD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. _ Several petitions were presented against the abolition of church rates. THE LAW OF MORTMAIN. Lord CRAN WORTH introduced a bill to amend the law of tuortmain. A bill on the same subject was introduced last sas,sion, but certain clauses were not looked upon very favourably. Those clauses he had carefully excluded from the present measure. After a few observations from the LORD CHANCEL • LOR, the bill was read a first time. THE LABOURING CLASSES. The Earl of DERBY said he found there was an objec• tion to the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the effect that would be produced by the various metropolitan railway sc h emes now b e f ore th e h ouse in displacing a large number of the labouring classes of the metropolis. It was supposed that such a committee might impede the ordinary course of private legislation. He thought it was necessary that an instruction should be sent to the committees that were to meet on Monday to inquire into the number of houses and labourers that would be displaced in carrying out the proposed railways. The Duke of NEWCASTLE said ho thought the noble lord had better give notice of his intention to move that such an instruction be sent to those committees rather than do so without giving the usual notice. He did not think there would be any necessity of sending such an instruction, as there was always a return made of the description the noble lord had men tioned. After a short discussion , in which Lord Redesdale and Lord Stanley of Alderley took part, The Earl of DERBY said he would then give notice that on Monday next he shou ld move that inst ruc ti ons to the effect he had mentioned should be sent to those committees. QUALIFICATION FOR OFFICES BILL. This bill was brought up from the Commons and read a first time. ' TRADE MARKS BILL. The house then went into committee on this bill, and after a verbal alteration had been made by Lord Cunms 70RD, the whole of the clauses were agreed to, and the bill was reported. STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. Their lordships glen adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. PETITIONS. Some petitions were presented against the duty on fire insurances; against abolition of church rates; against the Parochial Assessments Bill ; in favour of a Reform Bill, &c. CHURCH RATES. Sir J. TRELAWNY said he would postpone the third reading of the Church Rates Bill until the sth of Jane. AGRICULTURAL LABOURERS' EARNINGS (IRELAND). Lord DUNKELLIN moved for a return of the average rate of weekly earnings of agricultural labourers in Ireland for the last six months previous to the lit day of January, 1861, to be furnished from each county in so far as the same can be readily ascertained.—Ordered. THE SLAVE TRADE. On the motion of Lord A. CHURCHILL the following returns were ordered :—Return of the names of her Ma jesty's ships employed in the suppression of the slave trade, distinguishing the stations, from the year 1865 to the year 1859 inclusive, and specifying the class of each vessel, the number of her guns, the amount of horse power (if steamer), and the number of her officers and men. And statement showing the number of deaths, and the number invalided, of officers, men, and boys belonging to the several ships employed in the suppression of the slave trade, distinguishing the stations, in each of the years from 1855 to 18.59 inclusive. Return of slave vessels captured by her Majesty's vessels of war during the years 1855, 1856, 1857, 1858, and 1859, stating-1. Name, tonnage, number of crew, and under what flag (if any) ; 2. by what vessel captured, and where ; 3, number of negroes on board, and how disposed of; 4. total amount of prize money paid to captors in each of the above mentioned years. COUNTY VOTERS. Sir E. COLEBROOKE gave notice that on an early day ho would move for leave to bring in a bill to amend the state of the franchise with respect to county voters. FORTIFICATIONS AT PLYMOUTH. In reply to Mr. WYLD, Mr. BARING said it was discovered that some defective piles were used in certain portions of the works at Ply mouth, but measures had been adopted to remedy this occurrence. POOR LAW MEDICAL OFFICERS. In reply to Mr. BEECROFT, Mr. VILLIERS said he was not aware that medical officers attached to unions were not remunerated for their professional services. SIR BALDWIN WALKER. Sir J. PAKINGTON—Sir, I rise to put a question to the noble lord the Secretary of the Admiralty, of which I have given him private notice. I have this morning re ceived a letter from a gentleman at Dcvonport, who is well known to me, and who, I think I may venture to say, would not have made me any statement which he did not believe to be strictly accurate. My object in putting the question is to ascertain from the noble lord whether the statement which I have received is true; and, as I think it is necessary that it should be understood with the utmost precision, if the house will permit me I shall read it. (Hear.) " Devonport, March 7. " Dear Sir,—lt appears the Admiralty telegraphed to the authorities here to despatch the Avon to intercept the Nar cissus, with a view to recall Sir B. Walker. "The Port-Admiral replied that the Hinialaya was under steam, and, being a very fast vessel, whether it would not be better to send her out to look after the Narcisaus. " The Admiralty answered, 'No • send the Avon ;' showing they had no wi s h t o reca ll gir B. Walker. The Avon is a mere tub." (Laughter and cheers.) I merely wieh to ask the noble lord, is that statement true ? (Cheers.) Lord C. PAGET—Sir, in reply to the question of my right hon. friend;perhaps the best thing I can do is to quote the telegrams that passed on this subject between the Admiralty and the Port-Admiral. (Hear, hear.) I must, however, premise these by saying that the Himalaya has been under repairs in the dockyard of Devonport ; that her cylinders have been very defective, and that it was very doubtful whether she might not require new ones. This explana tion will make the telegrams more " March 5. "From Plymouth to the Admiralty.—The Himalaya has gone out on her trial.—(Received at 11.42 a.m.) " To Plymouth.—Send the Avon to the southward of the Eddystone to endeavour to intercept the Narcissus. Make the offieer the, bearer or an order to Sir B. Walker to repair to Dovonport.—(Sent 11.52 a.m.) "From Plymouth—The Himalaya is just returning into the Sound.. Shall she also proceed in search of the Nar cissus?--(Received 1.21 p.m.) " To Plymouth—Why does she return so soon ? (Laugh ter ) What. is the state of the weather ? (Renewed laugh - ter).:-(Sent 'l.ls p.m.) ."Ficatirlymouth—l have signalised to the Himalaya to know why she has returned. in answer to a question pre• viCuily asked whether trial was satisfactory, she has Cannot report until to-morrow morning.' Weather, moderate and overcast ; wind, west by south.—(Received 2.24p-.m.) " From Plymouth—The Ilimalaya's trial is concluded, but officers cannot report until cylinders have been examined inside.—(Received 2.44 p.m.) "To Plymouth—The Himalaya need not be sent in search of the Narcissus in addition to the Avon. (Laugh ter, and Hear, hear.)—(tient 3 pm.) "From Plymouth—the Avon proceeded under. steam at 3 p.m.—(Received 3.30 'mi.)" These were the telegrams received on that day. On the day following this telegram was received " March 6. " From Plymouth—Examination of the Himalaya con . eluded. The hull appears perfectly sound; the after cylinder is so defective that the ship could not proceed to sea without incurring serious risk. Written report will be sent by post.—(Received 11.27 a.m.)" (Hear, hear.) Sir J. FAKING TON—I wish now to put the question Which lasked yesterday, and which the noble lord slid he could not answer without notice. I want to know whether there were not other steamers—fast and powerful steamers, one of them being the Jason—in Plymouth harbour, at the disposal of the Admiralty, at the time they sent out the Avon to bring back Sir Baldwin Walker? (Hear, hear.) Lord C. PAGET could only say that, under all the circum stances, the Admiralty considered that the best vessel that could be sent was the Avon. He regretted those constant and unremitting attacks on the Ad miral ty— (cheers from the Ministerial benchee) Made it necessary for him to go parti cularly into the circumstances of the case. The Avon was ordered to go out into the Channel b cut off the Narcissus, fled to follow her. (Hear.) No vessel lying at Devonport could possibly hsve followed a smart-going steam frigate like the Narcissus. (Hear, hear.) The order given to the Avon was to cut her off, and she had endeavoured to do eo. aehad peen the log of other vessels of war coming up the Cheanel—that _of the Penguin for example—which fell in with the liaroissu.S, and it was a curious fact that the Avon ni Ixtit have been very close to her. (A laugh.) ‘ I.I )TIII . GHAM wished to know whether the Go admitted that it was impossible to bring back Sir Walket P i - verlgtaki;LitePtill. aIteNnSTONE looked upon this as a matter of ealled'on. eh rte On Friday night several members : e m . ent to recall Sir B. Walker. (Cries of " OrderP conclude with a motion, in order that he might.b 4 ° Z e l l the r. Sir B. Walker was then in Yar mouth Roade;,...,hi re Narcissus lay till 10.30 on slon day morning, When s h e , e p isati oe: fi e e d d ed to sea. The weather was then such ithat he was " no man would have pro ceeded to sea of his own f ree w l t _ h (he b e ee r)--and the inference caught. he drew was that Sir B. Walk er (eb n forced to go to sea t . And with orders not to be Lord C. PAGET . rose to order. , th ee e rs and laughter.) gentleman's statements were- totall hon. and gallant gen unfounded. S . 13' Walker had no such orders from the Admiralty. .( e tr r Si' T. KLPHINSTONE wanted to get at theetta a-. ' _ alp friboation. (Cheers.) Ile wished for more informitr f 1114.'0 91 EY rose to order; The time for asldug qua, tions had not passed, and till then no statement could be made by any member. Sir J. ELPHTNSTONE would move the adjoai nment of the house to put himself in order. (Hear.) It . hoved the Admiralty to clear up this question. The h a-se had ap pointed a committee of inquiry into the doing; of the Admi ralty, and Sir B. Walker would be of the r, eatest service on that committee. He had been for 20 y, rs Surveyor of the Navy ; he had been concerned in two reconstructions of the navy,. and understood more of the working of the Admi ralty than any other man. (Hear.) He had nevertheless been sent to the Cape of Good Hope, and his belief was that the labours of the committee would be futile without the assistance of that officer. (Hear, hear.) He wished to know whether Sir B. Walker had not been forced to sea at a time when no ship, on account of the weather, would naturally have proceeded to sea, and in a gale of wind ? (Hear, hear.) He would also ask whether the Himalaya was not fit enough, even with her injured cylinders, to go to work in the Channel, though not fit to go to the East or West Indies ? (Hear, hear.) Instead of employing her the Admiralty sent out an old used-up paddle steamer worth nothing. (Hear, hear.) All she could do was to get a little southwards of Eddystone, off the Lizard, and there stop. He asked why the Narcissus was ever allowed to pass llurst Castle on Monday night, after the expression of opinion in that house on the previous Friday, and he sug gested that if the Admiralty were to send a fast vessel to Madeira, Sir B. Walker could yet be got. (Hear.) He then moved the adjournment of the house. Mr. W. S. LINDSAY said the hon. and gallant member for Portsmouth had on Friday expressed a desire that Sir B. Walker should be kept at home, The noble lord the Secretary to the Admiralty then said that the Government had no objection to that course. The only one he could con sult was the hon. and gallant member (Admiral Duncombe), who had moved for the appointment of the committee, and that hon. and gallant member distinctly stated that he did not think the evidence of Sir B. Walker would be required before the committee. (Hear.) The noble lord, having no other one to consult, did not then take any steps to detain Sir B. Walker; (but two nights afterwards the right hon. gentleman the member for Droitwich expressed a strong opinion that Sir B. Walker should be detained, and even went so far as to say that the committee would be a total failure unless he was detained. Other mem bers spoke to the same effect, and then the Government adopted every means in their power to stop Sir Baldwin Walker. (No, no.) He must say he was surprised at the number of telegraphs that had passed to and fro on the sub ject, and he doubted whether - even the Himalaya could have overtaken the Narcissus.. The Admiralty, he believed, took the only course that was practicable, and he could tell, gentlemen that it was not so easy a matter to intercept a vessel at sea. So far es he could see the Admiralty had done all in their power to carry out the wishes of the house. ' Mr. 141s,TLEY wished to put a question to the gallant admiral (Duncombe) who had moved for the committee. Now that thehouse had been informed of the fact that Sir B. Walker had escaped, he asked whether his hon. and gal lant friend would be kind enough to postpone the nomina tion of the committee till Monday or Tuesday. He had agreed to serve on the committee; but hewished to have time to consider whether he ought now to serve on it or not, having great doubts whether the .committee could be of any public utility. They must remember that this was no ordi nary committee, but one which, would have to undergo great and lengthened labour ; and the question with him was whether, in the abeence of Sir B. Walker, its labours would be of any use. (Hear.) Admiral DUNCOMBE begged to state that he had not the slightest objection to postpone the nomination of the committee. (Hear.) His desire, however, was, that now the house had decided to have a committee, no unnecessary delay in its appointment should take place. Some delay had already taken place in consequence of the motion brought forward the other evening by the hon. and gallant member for Portsmouth. He wasin doubt whether his hon. and gallant friend, having carried his motion for a commit tee on another subject, would be able to serve on the Admi ralty committee. He found that his hon. and gallant friend would still be able to serve on the committee, and he was desirous that as little further delay should take place as pos sible. He should be sorry if anything prevented his right hon. friend, (Mr. Henley) from serving on the committee, as his presence upon it would be of the greatest possible im portance. (Hear, hear.) He must say that he thought a great stalking horse had been made of this matter of Sir B. Walker. (Cheers.) He had already stated, and he was still of the same opinion, that the presence of Sir B. Walker before the committee was not necessary, seeing he had already been examined by the Dock Commission. (Hear.) That commission was about to report, and nothing would be easier' than to refer Sir B. Walker's evidence to the select committee. The fact was that Sir B. Walker was so anxious, and ho might say over- careful, as to every word he said, that he was not so good a witness as might be supposed, and his evidence already in print would be more valuable than Sir Baldwin himself. 'lt was evident that the Admi ralty had made one mistake—in not putting the Avon under the command of his hon. friend the member for Portsmouth —(a laugh)—for his hon. friend (Sir J. Elphinstone) said nothing would have been easier than to have cut him off. Naval officers sent on special orders were, however, he thought, usually active and diligent, and he felt satisfied that if it had been possible the duty would have been accom plished. When he understood that the Government ac ceded to his commission, and that Sir B. Walker would be detained to give evidence before it, if the committee thought it necessary, he expressed an opinion that the public service demanded that the gallant admiral should leave this country and repair to his station as rapidly as possible. Sir Baldwin was appointed to his command before the committee was thought of, and, as the Cape. of Good Hope station had been without a commander for six or eight months, he could not allow the public service to suffer from any sup posed necessity for the presence of that individual. (Hear.) Lord C. PAGET—I am only going to say one word in answer to the hon. baronet (Sir J. Elphinstcne). I stated distinctly that the Admiralty had not either publicly or privately given any order to Sir B. Walker to get away as soon as he could, so as to avoid any chance of being stopped. Sir Baldwin's orders were sent to him on Wednesday, and he did not leave until Saturday. There has been no further communication with him, and the first knowledge of his whereabouts was a letter from him received at the Admiralty on Wednesday, stating that he was under way, and had left Yarmouth Roads within the Needles on the morning of the 4th. It is a totally inaccurate assertion that the Admi ralty desired to force him of. It is equally inaccurate to state that the Admiralty, when they had the opportunity of stop ping him in Yarmouth Roads, failed to do so. (Cheers.) Sir J. PAKINGTON—I should not have taken any part in this discussion—(oh, oh, and laughter)—but for the speech of the hon. member for Sunderland. As long ago as the 15th of February I spoke to the hon. gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury, and also to the noble lord the Secretary to the Admiralty, and expressed my strong opinion that the Vence of Sir B. Walker was necessary for the committee, and that I hoped he would receive an in timation that it was necessary for him to stay and be exa mined. Then I explained to the house why, in my opinion, it was of importance that Sir B. Walker should be exa mined. Nothing further occurred until Thursday in last week, when the hon. gentleman the member for Ports mouth, in moving his resolutions relative to the Admiralty made a strong statement of the importance of Sir B. 'Walker's evidence. I followed, and repeated my opinion to the same effect. The noble lord the Secretary to the Admiralty then gave a pledge that if it were the wish of the House of Com mons Sir B. Walker should be detained. Lord C. PAGET—I really must correct the right hon. gentleman. (Cries of Order.) Sir J. PAKINGTON—I have stated nothing that is not correct. (Hear, hear.) The next night my right hon. friend (Mr. Henley) repeated his strong opinion that Sir B. Walker ought to give evidence.. On both occasions these opinions were received by the house in the manner in which it is the habit of hon. members to express their concurrence. (Hear, hear.) There was the wish of the hon. gentleman (Sir J. Elphinstone), that of - my right hon. friend (Mr. Henley), and my own, all strongly declared, against which no strong opinion was expressed, except by the gallant gentleman (Admiral Buncombe) who. told the noble lord he did not wish to detain Sir B. Walker. This occurred on Friday night, and on Saturday morning Sir B. Walker went to sea. Late on Monday evening I called the attention of the Government and of the house to the circumstances under which Sir B. Walker was sent to sea, and what occurred then ? The noble lord, the Secretary to the Admiralty, in answer to an appeal made to, him by myself and others, pledged himself that night to take steps which should secute the recal of Sir B. Walker. The noble lord the Prime Minister followed, and his expression was "immediate steps shall be taken," We have now heard from the noble lord the manner in which that twofold pledge was redeemed. Nothing was done that night. At nearly 12 o'clock next I day a telegram was sent down to Devonport, and an order wa s given that the Avon, the slowest vessel in the service —(a laugh)—at least one of the slowest—should be sent after the Admiral, while two or three of the most powerful vessels in the service were at the di s p osa l of the Admiralty. ( c r i es o f " Hear, hear I") This the noble lord forgot, or he would never have said that the Government did all they could to secure the return of Sir B. Walker. (ch um) Mr. BENTINCK said that occasional discussions of this kind were very refreshing— (a laugh)—but fair play and a proper understanding of the merits of the case should not be lost sight of. The noble lord (C. Paget) had been dis tinctly charged with having hroken his pledge to thi s house. (No I) Now, having been present at all the dis cussions on this subject, and having been nominated to serve on the committee, he had listened with great atten tion to what took place, and he felt bound to say that this charge against the noble lord was totally unfounded. (Loud cheers, and a voice from the Opposition benches— " There has been no such charge.") Yes, the noble lord had been charged distinctly with having broken his pledge— (cheers)—and that charge was, he thought, without founda tion. (Hear, hear.) An appeal had been made to the noble lord, and he expressed the willingness of the Admiralty to detain Sir B. Walker if sueh were the wish of the house. After consulting the hon. and gallant Admiral, however, the noble lord found that the committee did not think it necessary for the gallant Admiral to remain. A suggestion baitcatainly been made on that (the Opposition) side, but :It had not been followed up by any distinct motion or re §nnenclation on the subject—(" Ohl")--sad the noble ; , 'IL tit Asali lord was therefore, he thought, exonerated from the charge of having violated any pledge. (Hear.) The noble lord and the Admiralty had been charged with having trifled with the house in undertaking to recall Sir B. Walker. Hon._members had gone on harping on the fact that the Himalaya was not sent after him. Reasons had been given by the noble lord. The Avon, it was true, was a very slow boat, as slow as a tub. (A laugh.) But every man conver sant with the subject must know that the object in sending out the Avon was not to chase the Narcissus, but to cut her off—(cheers)—and if only three knots an hour could be got out of her, she was just as competent for that duty as the fastest steamer. (" Oh, oh I" and' Hear, hear."); He challenged his hon. friends to disprove this statement. It It appeared from the log of the Avon, that so far from being unable on account of her slowness to cut off the Narcissus, she was actually dodging in the track of the Narcissus at the time the Narcissus passed Plymouth; but the state of the weather prevented any communication between the two vessels. He, therefore, asked what would have been gained by the sending out a vessel which would go 12 knots, in preference to one that could only go 7 knots an hour, if the vessel going 7 knots arrived at her destination in time ? (Hear, hear.) This entirely disposed of any suspicion that the Admiralty had not done all that could have been done under the circumstances. He quite agreed with the gallant admiral, the member for the East Riding, that the exami nation of Sir B. Walker was not necessary, and he could not listen to the observations made by many hon. members in total misconception without stating his own views on the subject. Mr. CONINGHA NI said that the real question was whe ther it was necessary that Sir B. Walker should appear before the committee, and whether the house expressed a desire the other evening that that gallant officer should be de tained. He had heard the whole discussion and went home with the conviction that Sir B. Walker's progress to his station would be stopped. When the position, which Sir B. Walker had held, was considered, it seemed like trifling with the house to send that gallant officer abroad on the eve of an important investigation respecting the navy—(hear, hear), and he was of opinion that the Government were bound to produce him as a witness. (Hear, hear.) Mr. COCHRANE expressed his regret that at the very time when a committee of inquiry was being appointed, the hon. member for Portsmouth should have made observa tions tending to raise doubts as to the veracity of the Admi ralty. Sir L. PALK said that, recollecting how eager a refor mer of abuses at tfie Admiralty the present noble Secretary to that Board used to be, he should have thought that the noble lord would have made every effort to bring all the evidence possible before the committee. (Cries of " Ques tion I") He was convinced that the opinion out of doors would be that fair play had not been exhibited towards that house, and that the Admiralty had managed to get rid of one who might have proved a very inconvenient witness for them. Mr. PAL LL wanted to know whether or not Sir B. Walker would be recalled and produced as a witness before that committee ? Sir J. ELPHINSTONE stated, in explanation, that he had not intended to cast any reflection upon the comman der of the Avon, for he had no doubt that if that officer had been on board any other ship, he would have found the Narcissus. (Hear.) The motion for the adjournment of the house was then negatived. THE ESTIMATES. In reply to General PEEL, who expressed his intention to make some observations upon the house going into Com mittee on the Army Estimates, before any vote should be taken, Lord J. RUSSELL said that the vote for the number of men for the army would be taken on Thursday, and the similar vote for the navy on Monday next. Tho CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER under stood that it might probably be necessary to take some votes on account for the naval service on Monday. THE INDIAN ARMY. On the motion that the house at its rising adjourn till Monday, - , Col. SYKES asked the Secretary for India what arrange ment was being made for the medical charge of her Majes ty's native troops in India, regular and irregular, to insure the language of the patients in hospital being understood by the European medical officer prescribing for them ; and what number of European officers were for the future to be attached to each of her Majesty's native regiments in India, regular and irregular. There would still be a large number of native troops in India, and he regarded it as of the ut most importance that the hospitals provided for their ac commodation should be placed in charge of competent medical men. Every sepoy officer knew that the most dan gerous prescriptions had been given from utter ignorance of the native language. He trusted that greater caution in the selection of medical officers would be exercised in future. Upon that point, however, he entertained the gravest doubts. A system was about to be established which he might describe as the result of a lust for centra lisation. The second part of his question was als*of great importance. It was proposed, he believed, that in future there should never be more than six European officers in a native regiment. He could not help thinking that this proposal, if carried out, would lead to the most lamentable results. Mr. CRAWFORD said the house was aware that there was a considerable number of natives of India residing in this country for the purpose of going through a medical education, with the hope of getting introduced into the medical service in India by the process of open competition. Great consternation had been produced among those per sons by a statement made by the Secretary for India some days ago. They were apprehensive that, whatever their attainments might be, they would in future be debarred from entering the medical service in India. He hoped that the impression which prevailed among them was without foundation, and that the Secretary of State would inform the house that in future all the services in India would be open to all the natives of India without distinction of caste or creed. Sir M. FARQUHAR asked the Secretary for India whether, in future, upon the appointment of officers of the local or line regiments in India to the new Staff Corps, or any civil employment, they would be struck off the strength of their regiments, and whether the vacancies so caused would be filled by the officers next in succession in their re spective regiments ; and whether there was to be any dis tinction between the services in this respect. It appeared from a letter which he had received from India, that the - general impression there was that when an officer was ap pointed to the new staff promotion would go in the regi ment. He was afraid, therefore, that a statement recently made in another place, pointing as it did to a different con clusion, would cause much dissatisfaction in India. Hitherto the great complaint had been that officers were constantly detached on civil and staff appointments, and that their regi ments had suffered in consequence. It was evident from what had been said in another place that'the stun, practice was to be continued. The result must inevitably be great inconvenience in regiments, and a serious injury to the whole service. He wished to know whether the two armies were to be placed on the same footing in this respect. Mr. VANSITTART, in asking the light hon. baronet the Secretary of State for India whether it was his intention to introduce any bills relating to India during the present session; and, if so, whether he had any objection to state the nature and objects of such b lls, hoped the heuse would permit him to offer a few very brief remarks. It would be in the recollection of the right hon. baronet that on the 9th February, 1860, he did himself the honour to submit a string of resolutions relative to India, which embraced the open ing up of the LegisUtive Council by increasing its numbers and powers ; the abolition of the Supreme Councils at the different presidency towns; and the amalgamation of the Supreme and Sadder Courts. These last two measures had been strongly recommended by successive committees, and by the noble lord the member for Lynn. His motion led to a debate, which was brought to a close by the right hon. baronet replying, " That these several questions were under the consideration of the Indian Council, and that he hoped before long to lay before the House such measures as may become necessary for carrying out the decisions which may ultimately be adopted. Under these circum stances he did not see what advantage would be gained by referring them for investigation to a committee of the nature applied for." A twelvemonth, however, having elapsed since the right hon. baronet gave that reply, and as it would be convenient to those who took an interest in Indian affairs to be made acquainted with the nature of the Bills to be introduced, he begged to draw his attention to the subject. Sir C. WOOD—In reply to the first question put to me by my hon. and gallant friend behind, as to the medical ser • vice in India, all I have to say is that the whole question is under the consideration of the Indian Council, and I am not prepared to say what resolution theyare likely to arrive at ; but this I may state, that every pains will be taken to obviate the evils which have been so strongly felt in India of putting medical officers in charge of the hospitals who may be unable to converse with the natives under their charge. (Hear, hear.) In answer to my hon. friend the member for the city of London, I may say that the state ment to which he has referred was made, not by me, but by the Under-Secretary for War, and related to the competi tion for surgeons in the general army of the Queen. What was said was that there were many cases in which natives of India and Africa, subjects of the Queen, could not be held entitled to serve in the general army. I do not consider at all that natives of India and Africa have a right to enter by competition generally into the army of the Queen. With regard•to the hon. and gallant officer's second question, he is aware th a t th e num b er o f officers usually attached to an irregular regiment is three or four. The Uovernments of India recommended that there should be six; and that re commendation, substantially, will be carried out. With regard to regular regiments no change has at present taken place. My own belief is that regiments would be more effi cient, on the irregular system, of six officers, and certainly it would lead to the economy of the service. With regard to the question of the hon. • bart. opposite, I have to state that it is not intended to place both services on identically the same footing. It is necessary to insure to every Indian officer precisely the promotion he has a right to expect. That arrangement must be strictly maintained. When an officer is taken from his regiment and put into the staff corps ho will be.precisely in the same position with regard to that re giment in which he :s at present on staff employment, and the effect of the arrangement will be this, that every Indian officer will attain his promotion precisely as soon—neither ,sooner noT la s ter than he would have done if no change whatever had been made in the Indian service. With re gard to officers going from the line to the staff, the Coul - has submitted to her Majesty, and her Majesty has approved an arrangement which will be emi nently for the benefit of the Indian army. If a captain in the line, for instance, goes into the staff corps his position must be filled up or the regiment would not be efficient; and the arrangement is that whenever a vacancy occurs in a line regiment by an officer going into the staff corps an officer of the Indian army will be placed in the line regiment, such Indian officer being a person of good character, recommended by the Governor-General and ap proved by the Commander-in-Chief. That will clearly be to the advantage of the Indian army, and must tend to obliterate all distinctions between them and the line. In regard to the question of the hon. member for Windsor, he has stated quite correctly what I said last year, that it had been my intention to introduce a bill for the amalgamation of the Supreme and Sadder Courts. In fact, I had a bill in draught for the purpose ; but he will remember that about the month of May there was great indisposition to deal with these Indian subjects, and I was unwillingly ob liged to postpone the introduction of the bill to carry out the intention of the Government in 1853, when I was Pre sident of the Board of Control. I have since consulted the Governor-General of India, thinking it desirable to avail myself of any information I could procure on the subject, and I had hoped before now to have received his observa tions. I have again prepared the bill, but have rather de layed its introduction, expecting to receive information from India. The bill is ready in draught, and will be introduced I hope, at an early period. With regard to the other ques tion, which is of still greater importance, as to alteration in the Legislative Council of India, the subject, as I stated last session, was under the consideration of the member of the Indian Council. What had occurred in India, and the different opinions held on the subject of taxation in India, had rendered this a matter of more grave consideration than it was at the early period of last session. I communicated with the Governor-General of India on the subject, and it is only to-day that I have received his opinions. All the in formation and assistance that could be expected from India having now come to hand, no time shall be lost in introduc ing those measures into the house. Mr. VANSITTART—Are there any other bills beside these ? Sir C. WOOD—There is certainly no other bill of any great importance. The motion for the adjournment of the house at its ris ing till Monday was then agreed to. THE DIPLOMATIC SERVICE. Mr. MILNES moved for a select committee to inquire into the constitution and efficiency of the present diplo matic service of the country. The hon. gentleman ob served that the part he had taken in the committee on the consular service had been but of a secondary character; and that it was to the ex-member for Stafford (Mr. Wise) that the house was mainly indebted for the investigation and the settlement of that question. In the course of the inquiry the committee often came upon questions affecting the diplomatic service ; and he had formed the opinion that a similar investigation into the diplomatic service would be a fitting corollary to that which had already taken place. The subject was not altogether a new one. In 1850 a com mittee upon official salaries was appointed; and the large range of its labours included the diplomatic service of the country. In their report they recommended a complete revision of our diplomatic establishments. They suggested that the embassies in Paris and Constantinople should be replaced by first class missions—instead of which, however, new embassies had been established in Vienna and St. Pe tersburg. Another recommendation of the committee, that a central German mission should be formed, in lieu of the present missions at Frankfort, Hanover, Stuttgardt, and other cities. Next they recommended the union of the mission at Florence with some other Italian one. That suggestion had been complied with, thanks not to the Fo reign-office, but to the progress of historical events which promised to give them a united Italy. Then the committee recommended that no diplomatic salary should exceed £5,000 a year exclusive of any allowance for rent. He did not believe that that had been complied with. Lastly, the committee urged a general revision of the diplomatic esta• blishments, observing that in some cases missions might be united, and in others consuls or consular agents might be substituted for missions, and a considerable saving of ex pense might thus be effected. He believed that since 1850 great alterations had taken place, and he thought it would be very desirable that the country should know what they were—should have an opportunity of judging whether they were in the direction which had been recommended, or, if not, what were the reasons assigned by different heads of the Fo reign-office for not having carried out more effectually the report. He was inclined to think that the recent changes had on the whole increased the efficiency of the service ; and it might be useful that the public should know what had already been done in the way of reform. Since 1850 the electric tele graph had greatly tended to alter the relations between our different missions and embassies and the Foreign-office. He believed that now despatches were written as much with a view to be laid before Parliament as to give instruc tions to our ministers abroad. The attention of the com mittee would be well bestowed upon the large unpaid por tion of the diplomatic rervice, which was quite an anomaly. At present young men remained from four or five to ten or twelve years attached to our diplomacy without receiving any consideration in the shape of salary or emolument. He doubted whether that was good either for the public service or for the career of those young men themselves. The ten dency of opinion was now to connect responsibility with emolument ; and to doubt whether any man would give the best of his mind and of his talents, unless be received some thing solid in the shape of pay. (Hear, hear.) The heads of missions had frequently told him that under thepresent system it was difficult either to enforce a due amount of discipline, or to exact a sufficient amount of labour. There were no doubt some missions of which the younger mem bers were regarded almost as members of a family. He might particularly instance the mission of a nobleman, now no more (Lord Westmoreland), who was always looked up to by those under him as a father and a friend. Another question that deserved consideration was whether it might not be possible for the heads of our missions abroad to have more frequent personal communication with the Foreign office. He felt that by living too much abroad:a man might lose, without knowing it; his power of estimating the force of public opinion at home, and his appreciation of English character. For these reasons he (the hon. gentleman) was desirous to see a committee appointed ; and he had no doubt that the result would be anything rather than to make us ashamed of our ministers abroad. (Hear, hear.) Mr. DUFF seconded the motion. It appeared to him that there were many German courts in which diplomatic agents might be appointed of the rank which was so use fully filled by our minister at Rome. In that way they would obtain a field for the exertions of younger men in which the Foreign-office would be able to judge of their merits. In some countries there was a considerable diver sity between ambassadorial and consular opinion ; and he suggested that a system of periodical visits to the consul ships might be established with great advantage. Although it was natural and proper that the younger members of missions :should mix in the, fashionable society of the place in which they lived, there was another society in which they would enjoy greater means of learning that which they Heacquaintancemade this remark h w o t f Ber lin because that ought hahad to know.one pe rsonal capital ; but he believed that it applied with still greater force to Vienna and St. Petersburg. Last year he had proposed as an experiment that one appointment should every year be thrown open to competition. He was aware that plan did not meet with much favour, but he thought that if the candidates were restricted to persons educated at the universities or the public schools no possible harm could result. Mr. B. COCHRANE said he hoped her Majesty's Govern ment would concede the appointment of this committee, which he thought had been proposed at a very appropriate time. One reason was the entire change which had taken place in the diplomatic) service, owing to the system of pub lic competition by examination having been introduced. He thought qualities were requisite for the diplomatic service which it was quite impossible to bring out by examination. He hoped under the new system the system of unpaid at taches would be done away with. He thought that to offer to the new class of candidates for diplomatic service the prospect of employment as unpaid attaches would be very unjust to them. He thought that the whole of the diplo matic service was an extremely ill-paid class of public servants. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he could hardly consent to this committee without saying that he must hold himself quite unpledged as to its results. He was sorry to say at once that he should be very unwilling to sanction a larger amount of expenditure upon the diploma tic service. He was sorry to say of late years it had been more and more the practice of the House of Commons, instead of leaving to the Crown the payment of the public services, rather to consider the means by which the payment of the public service should be increased. (Hear, hear.) What he should say was that the diplomatic corps was an extremely useful one. The information obtained from them was generally most reliable and valuable. As his hon. friend had observed, considerable changes had been in troduced in consequence of the use of the electric wire for the transmission of messages and answers. That, however, did not remove the necessity for the employment of messengers and despatches, in order to convey the results of long conversations between Ministers and courts. The question of unpaid attaches was a very important one ; but he could not agree that the condition of unpaid attaches was quite so bad as his hon. friend had represented. He said that these attaches served sometimes for 10 or 12 years without pay. But he (Lord J. Russell), on looking over the list the other day, could not find more than a few who had served for four or five years without pay. He believed that his hon. friend would find the arrangements at the Foreign-office for the transaction of business very complete —in fact, almost perfection, and that the manner in which business was carried on, without of course any reference to the immediate duties of the Secretary of State, presented .operations which were perfectly satisfactory. Everything was in order ; there was no confusion, and in agreeing to the committee, he . (Lord J. Russell) did not admit that there were any abuses which required investigation. Still, from time to time improvements might be made, and be was WY ready that a committee of the house should examine into every part of the diplomatic service. He certainly could not agree that a report of the committee on the salaries of pub lic officers was auy authority upon this or _upon any, other subject. He thought the committee had done its work very hastily, and with regard to the diplomatic service, he found that all its inquiries on this subject had been completed in the course of a few hours. The question having been put from the chair, Mr. HENLEY said he wished to point out to the house the state into which it was getting by reason of these mo tions. This was the third branch of the public service which was being placed in a kind of trust. The Admiralty had two nursing mothers, and the Cclonial department had to be inquired into as to the enormous military outlay in our colonies. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—There is also the income tax. Mr. HENLEY said he was very glad the right hon. gen tleman had suggested another. He (Mr. Henley) did not think that its inquiries wore on all fours with the question of considering the efficiency of a branch of the public ser vice. It would be difficult to find any one year in which three branches of the public service, with the consent of the Executive Government, have been made the subject of pub lic inquiry. All he could say was, he hoped the public ser vice would be benefited ; but he must say he had some doubt upon the subject, more especially as regarded the case of public servants, who brought their complaints before committees instead of applying to the heads of their own departments—the Ministers of the Crown. The motion was then agreed to. FIRE INSURANCE. Mr. H. B. SHERIDAN, after presenting petitions from eight places for the reduction of the duty on fire insurance, moved, pursuant to notice, to bring in a bill to reduce the duty on fire insurances. It was not necessary for him to trouble the house at the same length as on former occasions, for he thought the subject was never so well understood as at present. This was not an abstract proposition, such as was recently condemned by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but a definite proposal. There was a society in existence whose professed object it was to sweep away this tax alto. gether. That was not his object; he wished to show how the tax might be modified, and yet how the supposed defi ciency in the revenue would be supplied. His proposition was to reduce the duty from 3s. to ls. At the same time he was satisfied that the country would not consent to this reduction without being assured that the deficiency would be made good. The income arising from fire duty amounted at the present moment to £1,400,000. His proposal would affect two-thirds of that revenue. One class of insured pro perty was that which was called "extremely hazardous." The ordinary or prudential insurances were effected on household goods, ships and their cargoes, and property of that kind. It was out of this class of property, he thought the deficiency of £BOO,OOO would be made up. Not only would the number of insurances be largely increased as a permanent business, but a great number of insurances would at once take place, which were now ready to be carried out in expectation of the reduction of the tax. He ventured to predict that before two years had passed' the amount of business would be increased threefold. He need not refer to the well-known case of the Post-office, but he would men tion the instance of Post-office orders. From a pamphlet published by Mr. Riseborough Sharman, entitled " The Duty on Fire Insurances erroneous in Principle and injuri ous in Practice," it appeared that since the reduction of the charges on Post-office orders, in 1841, the number of applications had increased beyond all antioipation. It might be asked whether there was any margin in the event of a reduction taking place to make up the antici pated deficiency. That was a very natural question. In 1845 the national property was estimated at £2,200,000,000, and now amounted to £3,800,000,000. Reducing that by £800,000,000, as representing the national debt, there would be £3,000,000,000 left as representing the personal property of the country. The real property of the country, according to Mr. Porter, could not be very accurately ascertained. But it was estimated that the value of the real property in 1842 was 2,382 millions, exclusive of Ire land, and if they added for the 18 years which had since elapsed 600 millions, it would bring up the actual value of the real property of the country to 3,000 millions. A little work called the "Financial Register" fully confirmed that view of the case. Then taking the personal property into consideration, he found that there was about 4,000 millions which might be fairly termed insurable property. ,The increase in the value of that property had been chiefly in the shape of buildings upon land ; but, besides, there had been a great deal of additional property created by the reclamation of land. In Ireland alone, of late years, there had been an increase in the value of property from that source to the extent of £3,000,000, and a great deal of land had also been reclaimed in England. It would be idle for him to attempt to give anything like an accurate represen tation of the value of the national property of this country, all that he could do was to give some approximation drawn from Mr. Porter's able work upon that subject. Perhaps, so far as regarded the increase in personal property, one criterion would be the vast increase in the exports and imports within the last few years. Quoting from the figures in a valuable little work upon this subject by Mr. Leone Levi, he found that the whole amount of exports in 1855 was 260 millions, whereas in 1857 they were no less than 334 millions, being an increase of no less than 74 millions. The number of vessels which cleared out that year were no less than 97,500, with a tonnage of 22,300,000 tons, and if they estimated the value of the tonnage on the basis which Mr. M'Culloch had given, namely, £l3, it would give a gross value of no less than £289,900,000, and he would add to that the £600,000,600 which he estimated was the increase in per sonal property. They must remember that that was almost all of it insurable property. The practice had hitherto been, with reference to ships, to insure them during the time they were loading and unloading, and to charge so much per month on the insurance. He was prepared to say that if this daty was reduced it would very materially increase the insurance of that particular class of property. At pre sent a great many shipowners were their own insurers, in cluding moat of the shipping companies, and he attributed that fact almost entirely to the heavy duty now charged upon fire insurances. This amount of national wealth, which he had estimated at £6,000,000,000, was small com pared with the national wealth of France. There existed in France 180 milliards of insurable property, amounting to £7,200,000,000 of English money. That was exclusive of real propetty. In this country a proportionate increase of insurance was by no means equal to that of France. In 1835 the amount insures in this country was £500,000,000. In 1855 it had only £800,000,000. The revenue derived from fire insurance in 1815 was £1,062,000. In 1860 it was £1,100,000 or thereabouts. In England the habit of in • curing had existed for 180 years. In France it had existed for only 34 or 35 years. But whilst we had only insured 1,000 millions out of 4,000 millions, France had insured 2,200 millions. Might it not therefore be fairly argued that in this commercial country there was some reason for this non-insurance of property ? (Hear, hear.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer had argued that fire insurances were not likely to increase, because no great increase had followed the exemption of agricultural produce. But the actuary of the Guardian Insut ante-office had shown that in the first two years after the change the insurance on farming stock more than doubled ; that in the following five years it has increased 80 per cent, more ; and in the next five years, 20 per cent. more. (Hear, hear.) He now came to the un just character of the tax, and would instance the case of a society consisting of 1,000 members, proposing to insure each of its members to the extent of £l,OOO. Sup posing them to have contributed sufficient in premiums to meet the emergency, before they could hand over the amount the Government would step in and demand £2,000 for du' y. (Hear, hear.) This was neither more nor less than a fine on those who desired to take care of that which they had earned by their labour. It was a bonus to the public not to insure. On what principle could the Government claim £2,000 from a society before permitting them to pay £l,OOO, which was legitimately due ? If the profits of a company amounted to 20 per cent. the Government stepped in and took 1,000 per cent. on those profits for doing nothing beyond restricting its operations. (Hear, hear.) If the Government were anxious to destroy the national property they could not pursue a course more calculated to effect their object. Insured property to the extent of £1,000,000 was annually destroyed by fire, whilst the amount of un insured property annually burnt reached £5,000,000. If tho tax was viewed as a property tax the intentions of the Government might be understood. In that case let it be properly assessed. Property which was insured paid its share of the property tax in the same way as property that was uninsured, and he did not see why the provident insurer should be doubly taxed in respect of his property. (Hear, hear.) Why were the tenants of rich men ex cluded ? Why should agricultural property be exempt from the tax more than any other property of the country ? (Hear.) He looked upon the tax as a second property tax, unjustly, and he might also say dishonestly administered. A great deal had been said on former occasions of the absence of petitions on the part of the leading insurance offices of the country; but this evening a petition had been presented from all the leading insurance offices pro testing against the present duty. And this circumstance had the more force because the insurance offices derived a large income from the discounting of the large sums which they paid as duty. They could, therefore, be moved by no other consideration than this, that if the duty was reduced their business would be largely increased, and their revenue greatly augmented. If that was the view of the insurance offices, the very same consideration should also weigh with the Government. This was the stronzest argument which he could adduce in favour of the motion which he had to i submit to the house. The right hon. gentleman would no doubt urge two objections to that motion—first, that the motion was not submitted to the house by a member of the Government ; and second, that he had not the means to enable him to assent to the proposal. With regard to the first objection he had to observe, that since the last war no Government had attempted to correct this evil, and that all great reforms had not proceeded from the Government, but had peen forced on Government by independent members and by public opinion. But the Government had gone fur ther in this very matter, for when a French companymade an attempt to enable the people of this country to insure their property without payment of the duty, the paternal Government into; ,red uud induced Parliament to pass the 19th and 20th Vic., by which those rash persons 09 dare to protect their property from fire were subject to fine and imprisonment. With regard to the objection that there was no surplus to enable the Government to get rid of this duty, he begged to say that there had been a surplus over and over again since this duty was imposed, and he maintained that no person had a greater claim to the consideration of Govern ment than those persons who showed a desire to protect their property against accident. If this duty was to be treated as a tax upon property, let it be dealt with in that light, and he should be content; but if a tax upon property, it should be levied equitably, and the property tax collector should not pass by the shop of the man whose house was unin sured, ss he called at that of the man whose house was insured. The fact was that the duty was dishonest and unjust ; and he trusted the right hon. gentleman the Chan cellor of the Exchequer would show the country that he re garded the power with which he was entrust .?d as a trust to be exercised for the benefit of his fellow countrymen, Mr. HADFIELD seconded the motion. Mr. NORRIS said it was usual when an hon. gentleman came forward with a motion for a remission of taxation, to appear as the advocate and representative of some oppressed class of the community, who complained of the oppressive ness of a tax, or of the inequality of its incidette't; But they had that night the novel exhibition of the hon. mem ber for Dudley asking the house to fetter its independence by pledging itself to the remission of a tax which was peti tioned against by certain insurance offices. He believed it was the interest of the insurance offices more than that of the insured that had been brought before the house that night. He believed that if the Government had introduced a plan of insurance formed on a firm and satisfactory basis, which would at once give undoubted security to the assured, and might bring in a revenue to the Government, those very persons who now came forward as the advocates of forethought and prudence would be up in arms against it, and complaining that Government was about to interfere with their interests. (Hear.) For all these reasons, he trusted the house would resist the present proposal. Alderman SIDNEY supported the motion, contending that every reduction of duty which had hitherto been made had recouped the Exchequer, through the immense increase of trade which it had created. The revenue would not lose one sixpence by acceding to the proposition of the hon. mem ber. It might be a question whether the concession should be made this year—(hear, hear)—but surely they might permit the hon. member to bring in his bill. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—The hon. gentleman who has just sat down has stated that he never knew a more simple proposition than this submitted to the house, and yet it is impossible far its mover to bring it for ward in speeches of less than one, two, or three hours in length. (A. laugh.) However that may be, I must apolo gise to the house, because I frankly own my opinion that, as far as argument goes, this is an exhausted subject. I do the hon. member for Dudley this justice, that I think he has upon every occasion argued this question with the utmost ingenuity ; but his ingenuity is totally at fault ; he is corn pelled to resort to the most extraordinary expedients ; he is obliged to read to us in full detail a leading article from a newspaper, and certainly if it had been possible to avert that necessity the hon, member would have discovered the means of doing so. Far be it from me to deny that the sen timents of that leading article were admirably put; at the same time it appears to me that leading articles are written to be read in silence rather than in speeches. (Hear, hear.) After delivering his own speech the hon. member went on to deliver mine. I shall make a comment on that by and by. I only notice it now as a proof of the straits to which the hon. member found himself reduced; but I make this abservation, that, having delivered my speech, he also de livered his own answer to it, and I take the liberty of noting that, as far at least as I am concerned, the hon. gentleman has already exercised his right of reply, and will not be in a condition to exert it a second time. (Hear, and a laugh.) It appears to me that my hon. friend the member for Abing don has, in his reference to the mode, to the principles, and to the order in which financial subjects should be treated by this house, given reasons for the rejection of this motion. (Hear, hear.) Nevertheless, my respect for this subject, ex hausted though it is, obliges me, as the hon. A member has thought fit to state in full detail the important but very familiar points on which the argument for the repeal of the tax turns, briefly to advert to them. The hon. gentleman says that he proposes to reduce the fire insurance dutyfrom 3s. to Is., and as that prime facie removes from the revenue about two-thirds of the amount received from that source £1,400,000, what he asks the house to do on the present occasion is to vote the condemnation of £900,000 of the public revenue. [Mr. Sheridan—ZBoo,ooo.] It ap pears to me that £900,000 is a fairer statement of two thirds of £1,400,000 than £BOO,OOO. The hon. member who last sat down appeared to think that it was a matter of cour tesy to allow the introduction of the hon. gentleman's bill. I respectfully dissent from that proposition. If it were a matter of courtesy and nothing else, I am quite sure that I am speaking for my colleagues as well as myself when I say that we should be most happy to accord to the hon. gentle man that courtesy. But when the nature of a bill does not in any degree turn upon its structure or form of expression, when the whole effect and purport of the measure is dis tinctly avowed in the title which appears upon the notice paper, and in the speech of the hon. member who asks leave to introduce it, it is the ingenuous and straightforward course for the Government to adopt to state at the earliest moment its, opinion upon the measure. £900,000, then, is the sum which the hon. gentleman asks us now, upon the Bth of March, to determine to deduct from the revenue of the coming year. He does not make this demand without holding out to us the most alluring prospect, for he assures us, upon hie word, that he has the most comfortable belief that in the course of two or three years the whole of this sum would be replaced. Nay, more, the hon. gentleman goes the length of asserting that if we do but accede to his motion the ultimate effect will be that the tax will realise three times its present amount. [Mr. Sheridan—" T said it would produce three times the amount of the revenue re duced."] No doubt, the hon. member intended to say that the whole revenue would , be replaced. This astonishing po sition is one of these specious computations which one man is as free to make as anothepo. It is difficult to apply a test to such computations. I heard, however, the hon. member calculate the value of the shipping of the country. He said there were 22 million tons of shipping in this country, and that its value might be placed at £l3 a ton. That being so, I will give the house a specimen of the trustworthiness of the calculations on which the hon. gentleman expects that this £901,000 a-year will be replaced. The 22 million tons of shipping exist nowhere but in his own imagination. (A laugh.) That is not the amount of the shipping of this country, but the tonnage that passes in and out of the ports of this country. [Mr. Sheridan.—" I said so."] The same vessels may go in and out from five to 50 times in the course of the year. There are not 22,000,000 tons of ship ping in this country, but 4,600,000 tons. Here is the book, and the hon. gentleman may - make his own calculation of the value of the shipping at £l3 a ton. The difference, however, is astounding, and it is a bad specimen of the computations or conjectures of the hon. member. The hon. member quotes the Post-office, and especially the Money Order-office. But this is no example, and has nothing to do with the present case. That was never a tax at all, but a charge for the transaction of business, and it is a gratuit ous assumption that the reduction of that charge was the cause of the increase of the system. The money-order system was a perfect novelty. It spread with wonderful rapidity, and it was a discovery almost equally honourable with the original system of penny postage. But that re duction of charge was only one of the improvements that produced the effect. But what is the case of the penny postage in relation to the public revenue ? You made in 1839 an immense reduction in the postage of letters. The number of letters was stimulated by a variety of means, but you reduced the postage on letters far more in proportion than the hon. gentleman proposes to reduce the duty on fire insurance. We have had that new postal system with its reductions in use for 22 years, and we have not yet made up the revenue we lost in 1839. (Hear, hear.) We have heard it said that the reduction of duties does not impair the revenue. But can there be a grosser mistake than to assert as a universal proposition what is only true in particular cases ? (Hear, hear.) Make your selection with judgment, take the proper case, and then the reduc tion of a duty, nay, I will add the abolition of the duty, will not always reduce the revenue. Each case, however, must be judged on its own merits. I will take the hon. member's own parallel of the Post-office, and I will say I here was a clear proof that while the change was admirable, while the reduction was enormous, and while the new system was worked out by the very man who intro duced it, we have not yet replaced the revenue that was taken away 22 years ago, although I admit it was revenue well sacrificed, and that the benefit was ten 'times greater than the money lost. (Hear, hear.) Still, wo are now on fiscal grounds, and that is an issue that must not be changed or evaded. The hon. member objects to the exemption of farming stock from the duty on fire insurance. The hon. member, however, does not come down with an address to the Crown, or a resolution of this house, affirming that it is unjust to establish a distinction between farming and other stock not entitled to take advantage of that exemption. I recommend the hon. gentleman to make the experiment and try to get that distinction abolished. But if the Legislature acted wrongly and rashly in giving away £200,000 by the exemption of farming stock from duty, is that any reason why we should give away £900,000 more ? The hon. mem ber says there has been a greater increase in the property assured in France than in this country. Well, no wonder. The introduction of fire insurance into fiance is recent. Here it is 200 years old. As well might the hon. member suppose that because 12,000 miles of railway were made in this country last year the same extent will be made every year for the next 25 years. A grosser fallacy cannot be con ceived. The state of the law relative to fire- insurance is, however, very different in France. If a particular person has a house in a block of 12, and if a fire breaks out in his house and extends to the other 11, the losses of the other 11 are charged on the man in whose house the fire arises. In this country the risks are not so large, and the propor tion between the amount of property and the insurance is entirely different in the two countries. The hon. gen tleman may, from the analogy of the Post-office, have fair ground for expecting that a gradual and moderate increase will take place in the event of the reduc tion of the duty, but he has no ground for expecting that we can avert a henvy fiecel loss that may indeed con tinue for a number of years. I do not quarrel with the hon, member on the general question whether reduction in this tax may not be desirable, but let it be con sidered on its own merits, anti not on expectations not grounded on experience. I admit with him that in a cer tain state of our finances it might ix' just, wise, and expe dient to afford a reduction in the dul:y on fire insurances. But that is not the question now , before us. The hon. member says I shall object to the interference of a private member of Parliament in such a matter. No word has ever fallen from me approaching to such presumptiozr. It is the duty of every member of Parliament to propose the removal of any tax that he may consider burdensome to the people. But there is a mode and time of proposing such reductions, both for independent members and the Government. If the hon. member asks " when ought we to object ?" I say let him make his objection when his claim can be put in. competition with other claims, and not when he is in igno rance as he now is of the expenditure of the country for the year, and the means of meeting that expenditure. When the Government make their proposition to the house it will be seen whether, if there be a surplus, the mode of giving t. away proposed V the hon. member is wiser than that pro posed by the Gove.-nment. I know it is a popular saying IL. the house, that if the remission of a tax is suggested be fore :he budget the Chancellor of the Exchequer says that i t is too :we., and if after the budget that it is too late. (A. I do not know who ever said that—certainly I n la l tih v g er 'd ) id. I s 11 cite a case which appears to me to have been perfectly legitiOste and perfectly fair to all parties. In 1853 my ijeht hon. friend the member for Ashton moved the repeal o: t h e a d v , ertisement duty ; and after the budget was produced wd f om 'd that the prevailing feeling on the subject was such that, .although it was only the proposition of a private member,. 852 d althoughwe ourselves had proposed entirely different plats, we gave way and adopted the abolition of the duty. (Hear.) Now, this is the course which the hon. gentleman eho uld pursue. To demand £900,000 of annual revenue from' the Finance Mi nister of the country, before we know any ! . .hil. l g about the probable balance of income and expenditure, ig cb:mainly, to use the hon. gentleman's own words, a proposal of " stern and unflinching character." It is really too much for my nerves—(a laugh)—and I hope it will prove too much, also, for the nerves of the house. What right, in justice, r eason, or policy, has the hon. gentleman to take the reduction of this tax out of the category of other claims ? Does he meam to say that it is a claim of such a nature that we ought to grant it whether we have a surplus or not ? If so, I hope the house will beware of committing itself to a deficiency in the revenue. If the hon. gentleman says wo have the means to dispose of in this way, I tell him that he does not know. Till the close of the year, and till I know what the estimates are to be, I myself cannot presume to lay before the house any statement which would warrant that allegation. But then the hon. gentleman asserts that this claim is prior to all others. I shall be much surprised if the house proceeds prematurely and in the dark, to affirm that, proposition. (Hear, hear.) lam glad to have got from the hon. gentle man the meaning of his motion. It is that neither the in come-tax, nor the paper duty, nor the duty on tea, nor the duty on sugar, which are the chief claimants on the public revenue when the time of revision comes, are to be put in. competition with the duty on fire insurance. (Hear, hear.) While I think it• most objectionable, except under very ex traordinary and peculiar circumstances, to accept any pro posal for a iinanciol reduction without knowing what claims there may be on our liberality and justice, I hold it to be especially objectionable in a case like the present. The demand for the reduction of this tax, though favoured by public opinion, i s mainly supported by a powerful organised combination of wealthy ,bodies. (Hear, hear.) The house should therefore observe especial caution in such a case. Let as contrast this claim wit.h, for instance, that for the reduction of the duty on tea. That is a duty which in terests every human being d own to the lowest class of the community. (Hear.) There is not a single old woman. —(laughter)—l mean old women of the species whichnature produces, not that numerous clas.i which on articial but very substantial grounds receive that appellation ; an I say that the real old woman is the j t ot object of our consi deration—(hear, hear)—there is not one .of that class living on 2s. or 3s. a week doled out by the Board of Guardians who has not a direct interest in the reduction of the duty on tea; but there are no powerful companies, no ,-neat wealthy body of capitalists, to besiege the doors of this house with a demand for the repeal of the duty on tea. Ti.utt repeal will be urged on the ground of public interest alum.% Ido not wish you to pledge yourselves to any question of prio rity. I object to taking up one claim before the others. I object to your taking any step until you know the state of the probable income and expenditure, I object to your spending what you do not yet know that you have got. (Hear.) But above all, I object to your selecting for spe cial favour the claim for the reduction, of a duty which already competes, at too great an advantage, with other claims of a similar nature, being supported by those orga nised means of agitation which wealth has always at com mand. (Hear.) I hope that the house will refuse the motion of the hon. gentleman. It is our obligation as a GONVIII ment to bear in mind the condition of all the taxpayers of the kingdom, and to endeavour so to regulate the taxatiom of the country as to strike a fair balance between their in terests and claims. But it would be impossible to accom plish that task if the House of Commons were, as I am thankful it is not their practice to do, to make a, precipitate and premature decision at the bidding of a powerful interest in favour of a claim which is rather for the benefit of a class than of the public, to the disadvantage of other elahuo whicb are of more general interest, and may be found to In of greater weight. To take such a course would involve a. substantial betrayal of public duty, and would inflict a sub stantial injury on the people at large. (Hear, hear.) Mr. MALINS regarded this question not as one con-. netted with large and wealthy corporations, but as di rectly bearing on the middle and poorer classes of society. and while he agreed in much that had fallen from the right hon. gentleman, he dissented from the principle that the fire duty ought to be maintained in its integrity. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUEII said that he never made any such statement. Mr. MALINS had so understood the right hon. gentle man. If the right hon. gentleman was correct in his prin ciples as to the reduction of the wine duties last seasion he could not be right in maintaining that the fire duty ought not now to undergo reduction. He had no desire to embar rass the Government, and if the hon. member obtained leave to introduce his bill, for the introduction of which he (Mr. Malins) would vote, he should recommend him to postpone the second reading until the Chancellor of the Exchequer explained what was the surplus of taxation which resulted from last year's legislation—(laughter)--- and he believed that the country would rejoice a great deal more at the reduction of the fire insurance duty than it did at the attempted fiscal reductions last year. The high rate of duty had a natural tendency to keep down the amount of property insured. He therefore agreed with the hon. member that if his proposal were adopted there would be a considerable increase of insurances and no falling off of revenue. Mr. BLACK said he yesterday presented a petition from the merchants of Edinburgh against the tax; and on look ing over tho signatures he found that he had signed it him self. As it was his intention to vote against the present motion, it would seem inconsistent praying for a particular measure and then objecting to its introduction, but when he considered the present state of our finances, he thought he ought to pause before he voted with the hon. member for Dudley. Ho, however, was of opinion that this was a very bad tax, and ono of the very first which ought to be re pealed or reduced when the financial position of the coun• try permitted ; but from the whole tone of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that evening, it did not appear that there would be any surplus. Under these circumstances, to vote for the introduction of the bill and then to reserve their opposition for another stage of it, would be simply a waste of the time of the house. (Hear, hear.) He hoped, how ever, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would take the tax into his consideration as one of the very first to be dealt with in the event of a surplus accruing in the Exche quer. Mr. SPOONER said the reduction of the duty would be a great benefit to the community at large. Mr. B UCH ANAN said he would vote for the bill, retain ing to himself the privilege of moving amendments. Mr. GREGSON - madesome observations, which were in aodible in the gallery. Mr. CONINGHAM said the tax was perfectly indefen sible and monstrous in amount. (Hear, hear.) Mr. HENLEY opposed the bill. Taxation was neces sary, and this tax was one of those that did not require immediate reduction. Lord PALMERSTON said the arguments in support of the motion were illogical. They had bean told that if the tax were repealed the whole of it would go to insurers. Would any one insure him that the whole benefit of the remission would not go to the insurance offices ? (Hear.) He recollected when a tax was taken off beer the argument used for the remission was that the consumers would have the benefit of it, but experience proved that the brewer, not the consumer, had the advantage. (Hear.) The country was not in a position to repeal any tax. It was found ne cessary to place the country in a state of security, and for that purpose there must be taxation. The people of this country had raised 150,000 volunteers to secure the country and in that state of things it was not right to call upon the house to pronouree an opinion with respect to any particu lar tax. He hoped the house would not listen to the argu ments of the hon. member, or do anything to interfere with the taxation of the country until the Chancellor of the Ex chequer had made his financial statement. Mr. SHERIDAN briefly replied, after which the house divided, and the numbers were — For the m0ti0n........ Against it .......................... 138 M a j or ity against the motion ....-89 GRAND JURY PRESENTMENTS (IRELAND). Mr. BU TT rose to move for a select committee to in quire into and report upon the effect and operation of the laws regulating the raising of money by public assess ment for the making, maintaining, and repairing of the public highways, and for the other purposes now provided for by grand jury presentment in Ireland. After a short discussion, The house divided— For the motion Agaiust it Majority --81 The motion was consequently lost. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the house adjourned at 20 minutes past 12. LONDON : Printed and Published by 31.URDO YOUNG, at No. 112, Strand, I=rinta, at THE SUN Oflice, No. 112,Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the County of Mildleles, kittmlay, 1)144 0, 1861..