The Sun. — London, England, 1842-04-30 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, April 29. ROYAL ASSENTS. The Royal Assent was given by Commission, at Four o'Clock this clay, to the following Bills :—the Spirit Duties .(Ireland) Bill ; the Corn Importation Bill ; the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway Bill ; the Nottingham Gas Bill ; and the St. Austen Market-House Bill. The Lords Commissioners were, the Lord Chancellor, LOrd %Marneline, and the Duke of Buccleuch. The House then adjourned during pleasure. The House resumed at Five o'Clock. Several private Bills were brought up from the Com mons and read a first time. •SEVERN NAVIGATION BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. • CHARGE AGAINST .A MAGISTRATE. The Marquis 'of NORMANBY said he was now about to ask the question of which he had given notice to the l'inble Lord opposite, respecting the 'case of a pntleman named Biddulph. The charge was one which would press hard against an individual, and therefore he (the Noble Marquis) would not make it unless he were obliged by the strongest feeling of public duty. It would be recollected that in the course of the last Ses sion a Noble Earl, not now in his place, made, a motion, impugning the conduct of the first 4)t - iCe three Juries who tried the case with which Mr. Blattlpla Was . counected. He (the Noble Marquis) then said that the Solicitor-General had approved of the conduct of the Jury. Some time - after a letter was read . from Mr. Biddulph to the effect that what he (the Noble Marquis) had said was not accurate ; upon which he wrote to the Solicitor-General, who sent an answer which confirmed what he (the Noble Marquis) had said of the jury. Another fact was, that in the month of July a Jury said to have been dismissed for disagreement was dismissed because one of them became suddenly-ill. The conduct of the Crown prosecutors was Lest proved from thafact that. those who were to be tried on a capital charge were admitted to bail. Now he (the Noble Marquis) would draw the attention of the House to the conduct of Mr. Biddulph with respect to this case. He had. evidence in his head, fur.: hilted by two newspapers of opposite parties, which ; awe a report of the cross-examination of Mr. Biddulph and his servant, and from this report it appeared that between the two trials Mr. Biddulph did endeavour to make the two prisoners fiy from justice. His steward, Castles, said, that by desire of his master. he went to the fdther of 'one of the prisoners to induce him to persuade his son to fly a and when the old man said what will he cOme -of' the bail, then Castles'answer was, " I dare say the Government will 4 not look after the matter." Now, if ,this report turned out to be true, it certainly behoyed the Government to :inquire into the ease. * Here was a. Magistrate employed to execute the law, acknowledging upon his oath, and confirmed in his acknowledgment by the oath of his servant, that he (the Magistrate) had endeavoured to induce persons boimd over to take their trials for a serious offence to fly from the country. Mr. Biddulph's notion might, perhaps, be an amiable weakness, but what would have been the result if his advice had been taken ? Why, that the prejudice raised against the former Jury, which he hail assisted to establish by his communications to that House, would have been confirmed, and it would have been impossible to convince the public that that Jnry had done its duty. The theta were notorious, and were made public through the medium of the newspapers; and he must say he was much surprised that the attention of the Government had not been called to this matter, and it must have been the duty of certain parties engaged in this atatir to call the attention of the Government to it. When the Ipriner Ministry were in ofac, it was customary at the conclusion of every assize for confidential reports to be made to the Attorney-General of everything remarkable which took place during the assize. If that plan had been followed out in this case, he thought this matter would not have been allowed to go on.. He wished to knoW Whether any communication had taken place between Mr. Biddulph and the Irish Government. _ _ _ Earl DE GREY said, that when the Noble Marquis gave notice of this question, he (Earl de Grey) stated that he knew nothing of the case, but that he would en deavour to ascertain the merits of the case ; and as the shatter had been commented on in a very unjust and un it:USW manner, he should wish to say a few words upon it._ Mr. Biddulph's Offences were tried at three assizes ; at the first there was no verdict ; at the second a Juror was taken ill ; and at the third the prisoner . was acquitted. Their Lordships would know that a person in office had a good deal to du beside looking. into the newspapers ; he might see them or he might not, and be (Lord be Grey) could truly say that last year he was perfectly ignorant of the matter, and he knew nothing at all of it till within the last week. Every Government must, of course, act through its accredited agents, and with respect to the present agents he believed that no change had taken place, and the very same gentlemen now filled the offices at the assizes as filled them previous to his entering:Office, and as no orders had been given them, he (Lord be G.) believed they had not altered theifpractice. If anything occurred in assizes on the part of the Magis trates, the Judge takes note of it, and communicates his observations to the Government. The Judge upon that Assize, Chief Justice Pennefather, had made no communi cation to the Government -on the subject. it was true that he was ill for some time, end that might be the cause of his silence. But the fact was, however, that no peti tion, memorial, or other communication on the subject had reached the Government. He would not undertake to say that it was not the duty of the Government read the newspapers ; he could only say if they did so it would oe very laborious.--(Laughter.) If they did so they would find a great deal of advice as to who was to be dismissed and who was to be promoted. He had written to Ireland, but had not yet received the answer of the Lords Justices, why would, no doubt, take every means for ascertaining whether Mr. Bicldulph had acted in the manner of which he was charged. The Lord-Lieutenant of the County, who was unquestionably a gentleman 'of vigilance and impartiality, had made no communication to the Government on the subject of Mr. Biddulph ; but he .was no more hound to read the newspapers than was the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland. Ire had only to state the case so far as it affected the Government ; he had given instructions to have the case inquired into, and would do his best to have justice done with every impartiality, The Marquis of NORMANBY thought that, from the state the matter appeared to have reached, it would be improper for him to press it further. As to its being no part of the duty of. a Lord-Lieutenant to read the newspapers, if no other reports of trials at the Assizes appeared they we'm the best available. Earl FORTYLSCIJE trusted the affair, would have the effect of retraering,their .Lordships less ready to lend an ear to the 'imputations so frequently thrown out against the .ev.iduct of the Irish Juries when a verdict of (: . ' ll nr.tion was not immediately given. BOROUGH MAGISTRATES. Marquis of NORMANDY presented a petition from the Town 7 council of Gateshead against the late addition to the Magistracy of that borough. In Bath the number of. eouservative Magistrates had been increased, and in Chester there had - boen eight Magi strates, foot of whom were Liberal, and three Conserva- ives ; and six Conservlttives have since been added. lie wisi - ,ed to call the attention of the Noble and Learned Lord 'to this fact, as he (the Marquis of Normanby) V Masi dered that his question, on a former occasion, had 'let 'been fully answered, viz., that additions had been ' 421 de without reference to any public body, but upon the )2 1 iva.te responsibility of partisans. The LORD CILANCELLOR was quite sure the House would not much like this subject being intro • Muted night after night, and he had no doubt it would be rguxlly irksome for their Lordships to hear him on the subject. 'He admired the noncludaalce with which his Noble Friend had brought forward the subject. The Noble Marquis, after three or four weeks'.examinatien, had dis covered one or two instances in which he supposed that the appointments had been made for the purpose of turning the scale in favour of the Conservative inter est. In the case to which the Noble Marquis had per. ticularly referred, and of which notice had been given, he trusted he should be able at once to give satisfactory information. Had the Noble Marquis given notice of his intention of bringing Bath and Chester under the consideration of the House, he had no /doubt h e t . lrottld have been able to have given an explanation q' "'pally, satisfactory ; but it was really too much, • : .'it of 142 boroughs, to call upon him, without previeus notice, to give an account of the wanner in which the :.appointments had been made in one or two cases aelected for the purpose. He trusted he might be able to give a satisfactory explanation • with respect to Gateshead. Before he did so, perhaps their Lordships would allow him to state the po :,ition in which they were placed when they first came into office. There were in the county of Durham five rcri7 populous boroughs. Gateshead was one, Sunder- J an a Was another, Stockton. on-Tees was a third, Dar n= a fourth, and lastly the populous borough of South Shields. Would their Lordships credit it without .the evidence, that at the moment they came into office in these five boroughs, populous as they were, and with so many, Magistrates, . there was only one .Gonservative Justice of the Peace.—(Loud cheers.) Three of these boroughs were boroughs under the Reform Bill, and the whole of the boroughs were almost exclusively governed at the period to which he had referred by Magistrates of the same politics as 'the Noble Marquis. Having stated this, he would _explain the particular case of Gateshead. It was an extremely Populou s district, and when they first came into office, there nle, as th e N o bl e M arqu i s had stated, only six Magistrates, t ! one of wh om was a C onservat i ve, so that they were five to _ . ?few, he w ou ld p o i nt t o a s i ng l e c i rcumstance connected with .i. , ateshead. They must know that in boroughs the licens ing of vutilie-houses, was a very important consideration with respe.ot to returning Representatives to Parliantent. By the contrivance of the friends of the Noble Marquis, they took care *that the Conservative, a very respectable man, should ',aye no authority to withh(7as This gentleman was by respect to the licensing system. /had been selected, as businessllsbi a brewer, and, therefore, he brine of that business, had no 'avower to act in erantin,. This was .ease the Noble Marquis had br ltr u n n ses. the But then Gateshead had only six ht before the House. was not enough for its lar,,e M agistrate,, popaiisn t a be nuniber which added six, which would be grind to make the total number Government abeut equal to the number of Magistrates _ only in other towns of similar population ; but of the six Magistrates about seven miles out of the town; and aft er all one resided it found that there was an equal balance between the would Conserve • ives and the Whigs. But there was another important Gateshead was divt4ecl from Newcastle by a riv er , u o n h t wark was from Lo n d on ; so that if a eistiirbanc e took place r on one side of the water it must extend to the other, and therefore you could net consider the Magistrates on one side without considering • those on the '.other. 'Now; what was the state of the Newcastle Aliteistracy? • The ConSeryative • pirty had a tnajori of one on the Gateshead side, but on the New castle side . one Coniervatire, and ten Whigs ; so that if you added the unhappy Conservative in Gateshead to the one in Newcastle, Lie Whigs would haits a• majority of Moie• than two to one.—(Laughter.) Now he (th e L or d Ch ance ll or ) k n ew that the Noble Marquis was a consummate actor—( Laughter) —and it was therefore to be wondered that his Noble Friend did not calculate on the effect of these disclosures. He re- , membered the Noble Marquis said, before 'wring for the returns, that ha had been in office for more than two years, and had not appointed more than 50 or 60 Magistrates; but why? Be cause the places were already chock full o! Whigs. (Laughter.) But when did his Noble Friend begin his appointments? At the end of May, whereas Parliament was dissolved in the middle of June. But how did the Noble Marquis distribute his appointments ? In this manner—six to Birmingham ; five to Harwich ; three to Norwich ; and one to the sacred borough of Taunton.— (Laughter.) Shortly before there were five given to Bridge water, and three to Hastings. In every one of these boroughs a severe contest took place ; so that after 50 or 60 appoint ments of the Noble Marquis, '24 were made just before the election commenced. Nothing was done then until the 19th of August,' the very day after the meeting of Parliament, when the fate of the Government was decided. Then his Noble Friend renewed his activity, and from the 19th to tha 27th, just eight days, he created 33 Magistrates, as a reward to his partisans. Something had been said about following the ad vice of a town-council. This was very well when they were of the same politics as yourself.—(" Hear. hear," and loud laughter.) Now when the Reform Bill was passed, the borough of Poole., which had a Conservative town-council, recommended seven gentlemen to the Secretary of State, Lord John Russell, and his Lordship rejected every one of them, and appointed six Whigs and one Conservative ; but the Conservative had voted for Sir John Byng at the elec tion. He certainly was at a loss to know the reason why the Noble Marquis had attacked him, unless it was to show their Lordships a specimen of practical irony. —( A laugh.) He hoped their Lordships would think the explanation he had given satisfactory.—( Hear.) At all events, if he had sinned, his sins were scarcely visible in competition with the accumu lated mass of sin of the Noble Marquis.—( Cheers. ) The Marquis of NORMANBY. said if the Noble Lord had only given hie, a sample of what he (the Marquis of Nor manby) had done during the last seven or eight months in office, he (the Marquis of Normanby) had only given a sam ple of the misrepresentation the Noble Lord had made. On the last occasion of discussing this question, the Noble Lord said that in no case had they changed the maiority. He (the Marquis of Normanby had shown four cases where they ha , l done so. The Lord CHANCELLOR—Out of 150. The Marquis of NORMANBY—Out of 150 he would go on and find plenty more similar examples. But it the Noble Lord had admitted that he had done so four times he had abandoned his former assertion. If they looked to Gateshead and Bath, they would find there also the majority had been changed from Whigs to Conservatives. He (the Marquis of Normanby) denied that auy of the appointments which he had made during his last seven or eight months was made with any view to the elections; and if they wanted proof, he would refer their Lordships to Birmingham. After the riots there many 'Magistrates refused to act, and it was absolutely necessary to make new appointments for the sake of the proper administra tion of justice. The iVoble Lord referred to Bridgewater ; that was a case precisely similar to that of Birmingham. In the case of York, lie added four Magistrates on account of reports which he received of the insufficiency of the Magistracy; but to show mat he did not act with any view to the elections, what did he do ?. He added two Conservatives and two Whigs. The Noble and Learned Lord had spoken of practical irony, but what would the country think of 360 Magistrates, all of one side cf politics, added in that short time without' any reason whatever, and without any communication with the town-councils ?—(Hear, hear.) The LORD CHANCELLOR reminded the Noble Marquis that all the additions to the Magistracy with which he (the Lord Chancellor) had charged the Noble Marquis took place after the majority of 91, which decided the fate of the late Ministry. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY was surprised at the taste exhibited by the. Noble Marquis (Normanby), wi) came to their Lordships night after night, to be beaten again and again. Ile (the Marquis of Londonderry) held in his hand a list of the appointments in Sunderland, which comp!etely made ont the case brought forward by his Noble and Learned Friend on the woolsack. By his recurring to the subject after such repeated defeats, he thought the Noble Marquis must have been pressed-into the service by his Whig and Radical friends. He contended that the same partiality in the selection of Ma gistrates had prevailed in the county of Durham as well as the boroughs. The Marquis of NORMANBY said as far as he could follow the very rambling statement of the Noble Lord, all his suppositions were entirely and totally unfounded. As to the mo tives that had been alleged for his bringing the subject for ward, he could not allow the Noble Lord nor any one else to insinuate that he was actuated by any other motive than that of honestly doing his duty. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY had not intended to impute any motives to the Noble Lord. He thought the casti gation he had received this evening would deter him from bringing the subject forward again. The Earl of R ADN 0 R said, he must express his unfeigned disgust at what had taken place with respect to the late ap• pointments to the Magistracy. If what been said by the Noble and Learned Lord were true, that their appointments had been made a means of influencing the Electors, he had better give his proofs to some Member of the other House, and obtain articles of impeachment against his Noble Friend, and Lord J. Russell. He was surprised at the line taken by the Noble and Learned Lord ; he had not shown that any one of these Magistrates had misconducted himself, but had gone entirely on the ground that there ought to be a change of politics. What? were those Magistrates to be arraigned as partisans?— ( Hear,:hear. ) Had they in any way misconducted themselves? —( Hear.) They had not.—( Hear.) On the contrary, it appeared that they were fit for their situation. Why then were they to be accused of being partisans ? Yet, what he particularly complained of was the kind of defence which the Noble and Learned Lord Chancellor resorted to.—( Hear, bear.) It was the last which the Noble Lord in his situation ought to telerate.—( Hear, hear.) It was a defence which the Noble and Learned Lord ought to abjure.—( Cheers.) He (Lord Radnor) could not refrain from se . ) ing one word for the people of England, and he protested against the principle that the persons who were to administer justice should be chosen, not according to their fitness, but according to their polities.—( Hear, hear.) The Earl of WARWICK bore testimony to the truth of the charge against the late Government, that they were jail enced by party feeling in their appointments to the Magistracy. The effect in the city of Warwick was, that no one who was not of the Government faction could obtain a license for a public house. In Birmingham and Coventry the appointments were made with a similar bias; and at the time of the riots in Birmingham, there were but four Conservative Magistrates, and on them devolved the whole duty of preserving the town. What was the state of the torn of Warwick when the present Adminiitration came into office ? There were forty Magis trates, and out of that number there had been but one Con servative. Had they not been appointed for their political opinions in this case ? _ _ The Marquis of NORMANBY said the Noble Earl was Lord Lieutenant of the county, and if he had seen any impro per appointment, he might have complained. He (the Mar quis of Normanby) wished to say one word in reply to what had been said by the Noble and Learned Lord on the Wool sack. He had said that he (the Marquis of Normanby) had appointed parties for their political bias. These appointments had always been made upon the recommendation of the town councils. The Duke of WELLINGTON said it was not his intention to detain their Lordships, but in consequence of what had fallen from the Noble Earl, he would just call their Lordship? attention to what his Noble and Learned Friend had stated on the subject a few evenings ego. The Noble and Learned Lord had stated that having found on examination of the list of Magistrates, that they were composed of a majority of persona of one political party, he had felt it to be his duty to remedy the evil, and the inconvenience which it certainly was ; for how ever fit the parties might be for the performance of the. duties of the office, still it was bad to hale a majority on one side or the other, for when the parties were placed nearly equal in respect of party, justice was more hkelv to be done, Under these circumstances, he did not think that his Noble Friend had made himself liable to the attack which had been made upon him.—( Hear, hear.) He was siu.e that he did not deserve the charge made against him.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Marquis commented by stating, that his Noble and Learned Friend had not exactly acted up to the principles which he lead laid down. He (the Duke of Wellington) was not setteiently acquainted with the case to say how that parti ceter matter stood ; but this he did say, that his Noble and Learned Friend was not liable to the charge of having esta blished Magistrates on party principles; otw the contrary, he had endeavoured to establish the principle in that House, that Magistrates should be appointed solely according to their fitness for the duties.—(Hear The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that on the former oc casion he quoted the opinion of a Noble Baron, now no more, and also es 7 a Noble Lord who lately held the oat* which he (the Lord Chancellor) now lead. But as the Noble Earl was not present upon that occasion, he should read them again. Lord Holland said, " that the real responsibility of appointing Magistrates rested wholly with the Lord Chancellor, and it was the duty of that high functionary to appoint such persons only as were fit for the office; in common with the great mass of the country, the Noble Lord thought that, if men of one political colour were admitted t'o these officev, though justice might not be corrupted, tire adminis tration of it would be subject to doubt and suspicion."— ( Hear.) Lord Cottenham's opinion was equally distinct. His Lordship said, " that it was his opinion that there should be an admixture of persons of both parties in the Magistracy." Lord WYNFORD said that, on the general question, lie thought that, as far as the appointments to the Magistracy generally were concerned, polities had nothing whatever to de with them.—( Hear. ) The Earl of RADNOR explained. Was the Noble and Learned Lord called upon to create all those new Magistrates? The LORD CHANCELLOR—In almost every instance. The Earl of RADNOR—By whom? But he must say he retained the disgust he felt at the explanation given by the Noble and Learned Lord on a former discussion of this quer tion. If the conduct of the existing Magistrates had Veen complained of by the inhabitants of their respective distritts, there might be some excuse for the late infusion, but it was dis creditable to give cause to have it said that this had bean dune from political motives. Lord WHARNCLIFFE assured the Noble_ - earl that the inhabitants of miny districts h a d compla'- I e d of the core te e t the Magistrates with whom the G overnment tilea the Bench. The complaints did „,,e come from tt,. . e.:,eoioxiis, from respectable inhab , ! . „ ts, but and when 'these Statements were made who compleietel that justice was it ties the duty of the Government not fairly administe .i . e d to the Secret, of state, so to ref :e mu the Bee* by an infusion of new members, as to rereeeve this geonnd of complaint.—(Hear, hear.) Ho had made the teTharks he did for the express purpose of warning his politicil opponents of the consequences of such conduct as they were pursuing. If any inconvenience had arisen, he must say it proceeded from the conduct of the late Governteent, The Earl of WARWICK explained, and the conversation dropped. Lord PRUDHOE presented a isetitith from the county of Northumberland, against the Income-tax. DUTY ON APPLES. The Earl of WI eCtiILSEA presented a petition from the owners of live thousand acres of orchard plantation in East Kent, against the alteration in the duty on foreign apples. He thought that those people who had embarked all their property in the cultivation of fruit, on the faith that the Go- vernnacnt would protect them against the foreign produce, ought not to be exposed to a foreign competition which would utterly ruin them. It was not honest for any Legislature to withdraw suddenly a protection which had been for so long a time held out as an inducement to the people to invest their capital in the production of a particular commodity, agricultu ral or manufacturing. The Earl of RADNOR said that since protection had been taken off apples, the price had considerably risen. He hzd a paper which had been extensively circulated, and from which it appeared that the price in 1824, was 12s. ; in 1825, 105. 6d. ; 1826, Bs. ; 1e27, 7s. 31d. He would not trouble their Lordships by going over the whole years, up to the time the protection was taken off, but the price had decreased proportionably until the years 1836 and 1837, the year the protection was reduced, when the price was 2s. 4d. Therefore, the protection had been an injury to the apple-growers. A friend of his, not a Meni- . .bar of that House, who had lately returned from Holland, said he was riding one day, when he met two gentlemen, who entered into conversation respeeiing the tariff. One said he eould not understand the principle upon which it was formed, for duty was taken off some articles and heavy duties put on others, and he instanced the case of apples. The other re plied thzt there was a gentleman in the Illinistr" of the name many appl es were grown, of Kn a t c hb ull, who lived in a part of the country: where a grea t ma and this was th e reason t h e duty on apples had been raised. He (the Earl of Raduor) could not help thinking that that gentleman was quite right.—(Loud laughter.) He thought he had shown that the protection was not beneficial to the apple-growers, but, on the contrary, that it injured them. After a few words from the Earls of WINCHILSEA and RADNOR, the petition was laid upon the table. ELECTION COMMITTEES. Lord BROUGHAM said that he should put off the motion of which he had given notice, on the subject of Election Com mittees, till Monday next, when he certainly should bring it forward. At the same time he must say that he had looked in vain, in the Votes of the other House for a compliance with the most important part of a most important Act—the Bribery Act. There had been several cases of bribery reported, by which the sitting Members had been unseated, but yet he could find in the Votes no compliance with this very importantpart of that Act : " And also that the Committee shall report whether or not it shall have heen proved that such bribery was committed with the knowledge and consent of the sitting Members, or candidates." The Committees might have so re ported, hitt he saw nothing of it in the Votes. The provisions of the Bill seemed to have been overlooked in other respects ; it enacted that Election Committees should receive evidence touching the alleged matters of bribery, without its being neces sary that previous bribing . agency should have been proved, and that Committees in their Reports should separately report on the fact or facts of bribery, and also whether or not it shall have been proved that such briberies were committed with the knowledge and consent of any sitting Member or candidate. Now he found no traces of compliance with this provision; but he would fie into details on Monday. Their Lordships then Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, April. 29. The SPEAKER took his seat at Four o'clock, Sir Augustus Clifford, the Usher of the Black Rod, appeared at the Table, and summoned the House to the House of Lords, to hear the Royal Assent given by Commission to several Bills. On the return of the SPEAKER, the Grantou Pier Bill was read a third time. WICKLOW HARBOUR. Dr. BOWRING presented a petition against the Wicklow Harbour Bill. The Great North of England (Clarence and Hartle pool Junction) Railway Bill was read a third time and passed. The Saundersfoot Railway Bill was read a third time and passed. The New Cross Roads Bill, and the North Coal Mining Company Bill, were also read a third time and passed ; as was also the Kirkintilloch Roads (No. 1) Bill. The Firth Marine Insurance Company Bill was read a second time and ordered to he committed. lIOLYWELL ROADS BILL. On the motion of Mr. EDWARD BULLER it was ordered that the Committee on the Holyweil Roads Bill ,have leave to sit, and proceed with four selected Members. NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND). Mr. SHAW presented several petitions from places in the counties of Down, Cork, and elsewhere, against the present system of National Education, and in favour of the plan pursued by the Church Education Society. THE INCOME-TAX. Mr. ORD presented a petition from the attorneys and solicitors of Burlington, in the East Riding of the county of York, stating that they Were liable to stamp and other duties, from which others were exempt, and praying that . they might be exempted from the operation of the In come-tax. Mr. ORDISBY GORE presented a similar petition from Newport, in Shropshire. FEMALES IN COLLIERIES. Mr. BROTHERTON presented two petitions from the colliers employed in the collieries near Manchester, praying that means might be adapted to prevent the em ployment of females in coal-mines. THE TARIFF. An HON. MEMBER, on the Ministerial side of the Houle, presented a petition against the reduction of the duty on seed. EDUCATION. Mr. YOUNG presented a petition from the Clergy of Kilmore, in favour of Church Education in Ireland. _ Mr. Sergeant JACKSON presented a petition from the county of Down to the same effect. THE TARIFF. Mr. GODSON presented a petition from the inhabi tants of Kidderminster in favour of the Tariff and the Income-tax, and praying the House that they might be carried into effect with as little delay as possible. Mr. THOMAS BUNCOMBE presented a petition, signed by 1,100 of the master aud journeymen shoe makers of Marylebone, against any alteration of the duty on boots and shoes; also another petition, signed by the chairman of a public meeting of the parish of St. Luke's, against the Income-tax. NEW WRIT. . On the motion of Mr. TUFNELL, a new writ was ordered to issue for the borough of Brighton, in the place of J. N. Wigney, Esq. TAXATION. Mr. G. HEATHCOTE presented petitions from the South Division of the county of Lincoln, praying for a reduction in local and general taxation, should the pre sent measures of the Government be passed. Mr. PUSEY presented a petition from Wallingford against the duty on foreign cattle. CATHOLIC SOLDIERS IN INDIA. Mr. P. HOWARD presented a petition from the Catholics of Blackburn, in Lancashire, complaining of the grievances to which Catholics are subjected, and of the treatment of Catholic soldiers in India. BOROUGH-RATE. Lord R. GROSVENOR presented a petition from the county and city of Chester, praying for a legislative measure to separate the Boi - ough-rate from the Poor-rate. OATHS, Mr. HUME presented petitions from different con gregations of Christians against the practice of taking oaths. Mr. WALLACF presented a petition from Greenock against the coal duty. Lord ELIOT presented a petition from the King's County in favour of the Drainage (Ireland) Bill. Lord J. RUSSELL presented a petition praying that a graduated scale may be applied to taxes upon income, and that no tax may be imposed upon incomes of less than five hundred pounds a year. The Noble Lord also presented a petition from a person, whose name we could not hear. The petitioner stated that he had served as a seaman on board a 'merchant ship. Whilst so employed another sailor absconded from the vessel, whereupon the Captain called upon him (the petitioner) to account for his absence, and on his stating that he was unable to do so fifty lashes were inflicted upon him. For this injury he sought redress in the Courts of the Mauritius. The Captain was found guilty, subject to a point of law, the decision of which led to a new trial, and upon the second trial a verdict of not guilty was returned. The petitioner conceived that ho had been treated with great hardship, and prayed that if the law were not sufficieat to meet such 7c case it might be altered. Mr. L.ABOUCIIMIS presented a petition from Car rington, toroplaining that there was not sufficient spiritual provision for the Catholic soldiers and sailors in her Majesty's service. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a pttition Nom faftnert and labourers in Casaetown, prayikig for the abolition ur taxation on provisiowa: Sir ROBERT PEtt 'petition from Pais ley in favour of the financial propositions of her Majesty's GoVernMent ttis a petition to the same effect from' Glued - SOUTHAMPTON ELECTION: Mr. THESIGER wished to put a flutStion 10 tA Member, the Chairman, 'or Committm. h'itkAr Vvatther, in come quenze Yiytt'filliit which had happened to-day before the CvAtituitte, it was his (the Chairman's) intention to move for the discharge of Mr. William Rous Mabson from the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms ? Mr. REDINGTON said, in reply to the tpiegtibb bf the Hon. and Learned Member, he tiVlr. 4teditikton3 had stated to the Mute lu'Lit night; thAt it atlypillig - balliti before the C-oraruittee to %IYe* Okla the conduct .of the witness ;lite '4atitittibilYty, he (Mr. Rvdington) would h ave been tht) first to come down to the House to move his dis charge. He must however state that nothing had occurred to day calculated to remove the impression he had formed last night. Certainly all indittellitht littd ileen held out to the !Mtn, hid bb had Riliablititi to pro duce several partiep t Ohe must have been the person tielititreci. the papers to Captain Warch—rits of " Oh, oh.") He (Mr. It.) was stating the reason he had formed the opinion he had ttated: These parties were to be produced to , moi'roW- to pite whether the witness's eondtiCt wat `ebikei He should certainly likve ~Aitcll „ 1411111'ge it he thought this liras br'obat)lc) ag ine House would ad journ ,avek. he thought it would ue a hardship tbkin4 individual to , keep ltitp conduct. r 4'.:ft eu§tody. He cpnsidetedt as the case stood, t ...de Mtn had r „ Of 'hill:intent Ottglit to be fillte by . the se - (refOt 6bilture of "...nal 'rinse: BOVir t 15errertiy,*kr II ins Owing to taWn Icnndb.4 ifift kb( into the scrape ; thtte grounds that he stated he Vitr. Reddiittlin) was not prepared to make inbtibil for his discharge. NOTICES OF MOTION« Mr. Sergeant JACKSON gave notkciti‘At n INlYA\clay evening he would move for leave to bring in a Bill re specting (as we understood) Grand Jury presentmen'tis in Ireland. Mr, THESIGER gave I,llht lit the next meet ing of the Reuse he would move that William Roos Mabsoutt discharged from the custody of the Sergeant at6Arms. MINES AND COLLIERIES. Lord ASHLEY gave notice, that after the Whitilth holidays, he would call the attention of the House to the Report of the Commissioners of Mines and Collieries. THE TARIFF. Lord JOHN IitYBSELL said, that he understood from the Right Hon. Baronet that he would lay on the table a copy of the amended tariff with the present rates of duties ; if so, he wished to know if the Right Hon. Baronet was prepared to lay it on the table of the House, and also whether he had any objection to lay on the table a separate paper, containing the difference in the Customs' duties, on the I 1 th March and on the 11th Sir IL PEEL said that the Noble Lord was already in possession of the first paper alluded to, having laid it on the table of the House at his suggestion. With regard to the other paper, containing the duties of last year, for the purpose of comparing them with the proposed reduction in the duties on customs, he might say that the variations were not very important. The Noble Lord would have the original paper of Go vernment, which he thought would satisfy him. He had no objection to give the paper, but. with .a view to con venience he did not think it necessary. Lord JOHN RUSSELL then gave notice - that he Would, on Monday, move for the paper, belieVing:that it would be - usethl, . , MAIkLOW:ELECTION. • • Sir JOHN Y. BULLER rose to move, pursuant to notice, that Richard Gibbons, who had'been corninitted about three weeks ago for his conduct before the Mar low Election Committee, should be called to the bar, re primanded and discharged. 4e. (si 4 . J. Y. Buller) • thought that' the than Dad undergone sufficient punish. went, and that it was now time to recommend him to the lenient consideration of the House. He should not anticipate any opposition from any Member at the pre sent time. Mr. S. BARRY as one of the Members of ti.• Marlow Committee, was willing to second the motion. The SPEAKER having put the question dec!ared it to be carried. HOPS. Mr. DENNISON wished to know what operation it was intended the new tariff should have upon hops. Sir ROBERT PEEL said that next week he was to be attended by a deputation from the hop merchants, and before he had that interview he should not like to give any opinion upon the subject adverted to by the Hon. Member. BRAZILS. Mr. MILNER GIBSON wished to make fin inquiry of the Right Mon. Gentleman at the head of her Majesty's Government. on - a question regarding our relations with the Braziis. The Right Hon. Gentleman had given the country to understand that his chief, if not his only objection, to a reduction of the duty on sugar, was the fear that he should by so doing encourage the slave-trade in the Brazils, and he had understood the Right Hon. Baronet to say, that if he had not felt em barrassed by the slave-trade question, he should have fet it his duty to propose a considerable reduction in the duty on sugar immediately; but that he had not done so, because he thought it might tend to render abortive the effbrts that her Majesty's Government were making to restrain slavery. Now he wished to ask the Right Honourable Baronet whether, at the pre sent moment, he was making any decided effort to restrain slavery in the Brazils, and inasmuch as there was at present existing a treaty between this country and the Brazils, making the slave-trade illegal, and declaring it piracy, and binding the Brazilian Go vernment to discourage the importation of slaves into the Brazils, he was desirous of knowing if the Right Hon. Baronet were prepared to enforce that treaty. He was also desirous of knowing, if the British Government and the Brazilian Government had come to any uuderstand ine• respecting the period of the termination of the treaty of commerce now subsisting between the two countries. Sir R. PEEL said, that her Majesty's Government were always prepared to fulfil their engagements with foreign nations, and to require that other nations should fulfil their engagements with this country. Her Majesty's Govern , ment could not come to any understanding with the Go ' vernment of the Brazils respecting the period of the ex piration of the present treaty. 'The Noble Loyd the late Secretary for the Foreign Department had always con tended, and he (Sir R. Peel) thought justly contended, that the treaty would not expire until November, 1844. and that was the view entertained by her Majesty's Go vernment. The Government of Brazils were of a different opinion, and contended that the treaty would expire in November of the present year. Communica tions had taken place un the subject, but ho was not able to say that the Government- of the Brazils acquiesced in the construction placed by her Majesty's Government on that treaty. With respect to the subject of the restrain ing more effectually the slave•trade in the Brazils, com munications had passed. between the two Governments, but as yet this had led to no result. Lord PALMERSTON wished to put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet, which he hoped it would be in his power to answer. He (Lord Palmerston) was well aware that it was objectionable to ask, and improper to state, the nature of propositions which were in discussion between the Government of Great Britain and a foreign Government, and therefore inquiry upon such sub.;ects ought in general to be met with a refusal. But questions relating to slave-trade treaties were not subject to the general rule in that respect. He had himself never made any difficulty in stating the nature of negotiations entered into from time to time with other countries, with a view to the more effectually completing the suppression of tile slave trade. He did not know whether the Right Hon. Baronet would feel equally at liberty to give him (Lord.P.) the information which be was about to ask on that occasion. He wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet what the nature was of those further stipulations which had been proposed to the Government of the Brazils with a view to the sup pression of the slave-trade ; and whether they would give Great Britain increased powers of action, or whether they were merely engagements entered into by the Brazilian Government. He should be glad to find that increased powers were given to our cruisers engaged in the, suppression of the slave trade ; but he was sorry to say that he should not attach much importance to any additional engagements into which the Brazilian Government might enter, relative to the question of slavery and the slave-trade. Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that he very much doubted whether the Noble Lord would have answered such a question as he himself had put.—(A laugh.) The British Government was engaged in communica tions with the Government of the Brazils on the subject of slavery, to which no answer had yet been re ceived. He was sure that under those circumstances the Noble Lord would not press his question. ELECTION COMMITTEES. Mr. WYNN, who was heard very indistinctly in the gallery, said, he wished to call the attention of the House to an Act which was passed in the last session of Parlia ment, in reference to Election Committes. That Act pro vided that the Committee in making their Report should state' whether or not the sitting Member had been guilty of bribery. As caws of bribery might occur in which the sitting Member would not be liable, and. as Committees were still engaged in in vestigating such matters, he had certainly thought it necessary to call the attention of the House to the provisions of the Act.—(Hear, hear.) Colonel VIi;RNER said the Honourable and Learned Member for Cork, the Lord Mayor of Dublin, had a few days ago presented a petition from certain persons in the county of which he (Colonel Verner) had the honour to be one of the representatives. The Hon. and Learned Member having also given notice of his inten tion to move that that petition should be printed with the Votes, he (Colonel Verner) had attended in his place for the purpose of meeting the allegations set forth by the petitioners, but the Hon. and Learned Member declined to bring forward his motion. He wished to know whether it was. his intention to renew the notice of motion ? Mr. O'CONNELL said if it was any satisfaction to the Gallant Officer to know it, he (Mr. O'Connell) was happy to tell him that it was his fixed intention to bring the question bereft% the Itouiei Colonel VERNER would like to kn'ow when the Right Hon, and Learned Gentleman intended to bring it forward. Mr. O'CONNELL said at the earliest convenient period loossibl'4l Mr, itA.SPERMA.N wished to know whether any despatches had been feeeiVed from Jamaica regarding theirregularity of the conveyariee of letters cut to that place by the Steam-packet Conipany l s vessels. Lord STAXLEYS as We understood, said that no com plWititS had Wen received on the stitOct, i3USINESS OF THE HOUSit: Sir ROBERT, • PEEL said that, before Mt:lying tthb Oceiei Of tile Day that the House go into ~oinmittee on the Income-tax Bill, be should at tempt to ascertain the wishes and sentiments of the House respecting the consideration of that portion of the business which originated with her Majesty's q,i ove,mevt: 14.4 (Sir It: Peel) had proposed to take the TuesdaYS foljOwint the ittli of May; ftlf. the bpOnlicith•ittibil Of this Bill. He (Sir Robert Peel) should not interfere in such a matter as this, unless ho ascertained the feeling of the House upon it. An Hon. Gentleman had given notice respect ing the grievances of Catholics in the navy. Another Hon. Gentleman had given notice of a motion relative to Thtt two succeeding Tuesdays would be in ethise4lien6e taken up With these sullied& He should her6fefe 116 grotit hti €Ohlti uettlay; the Ritli or May, - ibr the consideration of the Bill. Of course he only threw out his suggestion in the hope that it would meet with the concurrence of both sides of the House. Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL did not wish to interfere with the business of the House, but the motion of which p h :r b so li n d!ti o v n e t ti o n f ote doors. icwa o The h n e e m tht was o a tionh pressed ehado upon n thepa h p i e m r f b o y r • the 9th of May, related to interference with the religious feelings of Catholics. Perhaps the Right Hon. Baronet would name Thursday instead of Tuesday. Sir R. PEEL said he had no objection s if those who fbi: that day Babe up their claim. ill r. HUME said he had a motion on the paper for Thursday, and had n if o o it hi m eo -e t r io e n a t l h lo a w t •e h d e by the n ß am ig e h T t - r n o r n a: day_.—(Laugliter.) Mf. J. O'CONNEtt said that as lay as he WaS con:- eereeth he Would not stand in the way of the business of the HO,tt.sOl fdiotild therefore withdraw the mo, tleti of by had even notice forU9tulaii tha nth of May. Sir R. PEEL then moved " That after Monday, the • ;;:n or Dixt,i.ts i xt 04 , 40 Of the Day Shall have Wee. 4n4:01.11,0'4404 *troll, bit utiiiiit i N yit3g es anti shall recartiii unaer consillefaz cedi L u o i Lord !t t RUSSELL n S w E t kL d c ar td it li g it i t o t t h o e it . , p l.l ii a p r ri o j et( ti. b ,a f a a i e t - 1 Vt- "- 1 1; 7 . 1 It Zulu oe inticn tor tne puone was ready to arii 'i,tl4, l *PQ o He was man whoglandad the likoiiikie z , nw i tste tkA•o4lrh d ury. it stow to a find mo t t h io a n t an for ri th e e nottr ol a t b li le 4 h' 14 % _ra'f, tut he hoped there would be no object on on the Dart of the House to give leave to bring in the Bill. With respect ,to this subject; he only wished to refer for a moment to the iMpUtations which had been thrown . Mitt, that eat dblay had taken place in %fro coitsh rati'i bl the. Income tax and the taritt trie course that had been pursued by Members on that side of the House, and a similiar accusation had beth Made with respect t o t h e C orn Bill. Now whale, ho Weald ask had taken place with respect 1 - ..0 that measure ? Why the Bill had been read a third time in the House of Lords last Friday ; and it was not until that day it had received the Royal Assent. That circumstance, lA, showed what little ground ther e 'was f he or tht e iin g putation.—(Hear, hear.) With regard to the tariff it could not but be right that every consideration should be given to the interest of the party affected by it. The motion was then agreed to. _ upon ra n le g ins arising or accruing to any person i . e , INCOME TAX. On the moti on o f t h e CHANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER, the H ouse reso l v ed itself i n t o a C omm i ttee n on the Incom e . tax Bill , M r. G REENE i n the Chair. wh C io rt h Aa p itzt v a i N ded pu ,, t t t h in a g t upthone the question anneal pro fits fi an a that Schedule resid ing in Great Britain, for any kind of pro perty what ever , w h et h er s it uate i n Great Bri tein or els ew h ere , or f rom a ru d e % h m e i l a d i p i l j oi r m e s e p n e t o , t n o l r y a N r • o r i c e a d ti 0 0 1, , a n i :w G li r c, e P t a h r t e e ii r fe r s i s t i t a o h i e n e . t c or - elsewhere, there should be charged yearly for every 20s. of the amount of such profits and gains, the sum 0f..741.,". • ' Mr. - S. CRAWZORD rose to more the omission of the words, " profession, trade, employment, or vocation." He did not say that trades and professions ought-to be exempt from - this tax if it •were a permanent one, but it was • proposed only ai a temporary tax, and it ought to be — accommodated to circumstances. Manufacturers and tradesmen ought, he, thought. to be exempt from the tax, first on account of the extra ordinary state of distress under which they were: labouring, and, secondly, because the House had recently passed a Bill for keeping up the prices of corn. Now there could be no doubt that the - distress •at present prevailing in the manufacturing districts had been occasioned in great measure by the corn duties, which had been imposed for the benefit of a particular class, namely, .the landed interest, and as long as that special benefit was conferred upon them they ought to bear the burden of the Income-tax. He knew it would be said that these proposed exceptions would creat_ a aefieieney,.but that he thought would be amply made up by extending the probate duty to all kinds of property indiscriminately. His great objection to the present Bill was, the inquisitorial nature of its enactments. He did not contend for the entire exemption of incomcs derived from manufactures from taxation, but he thought the fair proportion of taxation might be levied on them in another way. If an Juni:woe-tax were imposed upon the landed proprietor, it - Would be equitable to tax the houses and buildings of the manufacturers; that he thought would be infinitely preferable to making a scru tiny into the accounts of manufacturers and tradesmen. The Ho Member concluded by moving the omission of the words in schedule D which imposed a tax upon industrial incomes. Mr. ROEBUCK, in explaining the diffrence between his proposal and that of his Hon. Friend the*Member for Rochdale, stated that his Hon. Friend proposed to go farther than he contemplated by his amendment. Mr. HUME said, he wished to call the attention of the Comniittee to the principle on which the original - Income-tax proceeded, and which, in his opinion, was / the principle that ought now to be adopted. When the Income-tax of 1682 was improved, the principle adopted was to tax the interest of the profits, and not the profits themselves. They had no more right to tax the capital of the pro fessional man, whether it were 3,000/. or 5,0001, or any other sum, than they had to tax the capital of the same amount of the landed proprietor. In the case . of the landed proprietor at five per cent. the land produced 150/. a year. 'That was the sum they would tax, and the same principle ought to apply in taxing . the produce of the capital of a physician. The law, which was founded upon that principle, continued till 1806, when a new prin ciple was adopted. a principle of the robbery of ca pital to a great extent. They admitted that the produce of capital was to be taxed; but he would put a case to show that the interest only ought to be taxed. Suppose he purchased an annuity of 100/. for 20 year!, it was evident that he would re ceive the first year 5/. interest on the 100/., that was in ten years he would receive 100/. with his capital; but if he pail 10 per cent. his capital was taxed, and at the end 0120 years he was deprived of all his capital. Surely that could not be the intention, and he hoped it never would be enforced. The in terest of capital or:ly ought to be taxed, and that was the prin ciple they acted.on for many years. He should therefore sup port the restion. The CHAIRMAN having put the question, Mr. ROEBUCK wishedtc; know, if the question were dis posed of, in what. position he should be placed with regard to his motion. He did not wish to be deprived of the opportunity of dividing upon it. The CHAIRMAN asked the Hon. Member for Bath what It was that he was desirous of doing? Mr. ROEBUCK was desirous of proposing that the sche dule should be expunged The schedule proposed a tax urn the profits or gains at ising from any kind of property whatever, situate in Great Britain .or elsewhere; that he could under stand. Then came the words, "or from any profession, trade, employment, or vocation"—there he was puzzled. The motion of his Hon. Friend only went to industrial income, and eon sequently only applied to the latter part of the schedule. Now, he (Mr. Roebuck) was desirous that his motion should go to both parts of the schedule, and he wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet if the schedule could not be divided. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. .Roebuck) could put his amendment when the ear) , words of the clause were proposed, and if it were negatived, that the other amendment could be put afterwards. Mr. ROEBUCK said the amendment of his Hon. Friend did not apply to the former part of the clause. His aulendment merely went to the exception of industrial income ; now that was not profit. It applied merely to the latter part of the clause, to an income derived from profession, trade, employ ment, or vocation. The clause referred to two classes of property; the one was fixed property, the other was an income derived from professions, trades, or vocations. Now, he wished to know if the amendment for exempting income derived from industrial sources did not apply to the latter only and not to the former? The Hon. Member wished to exempt one-half only from the tax, and he wished to exempt all. Sir R. PEEL thought that the question might first be put, that upon the annual profits or gains arising or accruing to any person residing in Great Britain, from any kind of property whatever, whether situate in Great Britain, or elsewhere, there shall be charged yearly, for every twenty shillings of the amount of such profit or gain, a sum of seven-pence ; and that al er wards the question might be put, that upon the annual profits or gains arisinc , from any profession, trade, employment, or voca tion, whether the same shall be respectively carried on in Gi eat Britain or elsewhere, there shall be charged yearly for every twenty shillings of the amount of such profits or gains, the sum of seven-pence. - Mr. ROEBUCK said, the suggestion of the Right Hon. Baronet quite met his view. Mr. S. CRAWFORD was ready to assent to any arrange ment that would be most convenient. The CHAIRMAN having put the question, that the words be inserted, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, as he understood it, they were going to agree as to the first part, and then the two. Hon. Members must decide between themselves whether there should be a half tax or none. . . Lord HOWICK believed, that the course they should pursue would be this—first, they would agree in charging seven-pence in the pound on property, and then they would come to the professions, trades, employments, and vocations ; and with respect to those, they would divide upon the ques tion whether the blank should be filled up with seven-pence or three-pence halfpenny ; and then afterwards the motion of the Hon. Member for Rochdale might be decided. The question being again put by. the Chairman, Mr. ROEBUCK rose to make the motion of which he had given notice. His proposition was that there should be ' levied upon professions, trades, employments, or vocations, a tax of 3%d. instead of 7d., otherwise it would be an unequal tax. He had suggested to the Right Hon. Baronet, that softie means should be adopted to remedy , the proposed inequality in the different species of income. He was met by a statement on the part of the Right Hon. Baronet, that it would be im possible to obviate the ; while the Noble Lord, the Mem ber fof Londdii, took advantage of that position, saying thit he perfectly agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet, that it was ut terly impossible to remedy tre proposed inequality, by drawing a line of distinction between the different classes of incomes. The Noble Lord, therefore, after he had laid down these pre mises, concluded, very properly, that he could not consent in any way to the proposal of the Right Hon. Gentleman, which he,therefore, opposed altogether. The distinction between the parties was this, that the Right Honourable Gen tleman said that he had admitted that it was, im ' possible to render that tax equal, but that he should still ! impose the tax, while the Noble Lord said he agreed that the tat could not be rendered equal, and that he should, therefore, oppose it. Now he (Mr. Roebuck) came forward and took a middle cbtirst ; he clieptited the premises, and he consequently disputed the conclusion which the Noble Lord had adduced from those premises. He had three propoaitions to maintain; first, that there was an inequality in the mode of taxation proposed by the Right honourable Baronet; secondly, that being unequal it sinned against the great canons of taxation laid &ten by the highest authority ; and, thirdly, he had to press ripen the Right Honourable Baronet the adoption of a mode of remedying the inequality in question. That mode he was about to call upon the Right, Honotitable Baronet to adopt. He thought he would have little difficulty in proving that this tax was an unequal one. A tax which laid the same sum upon the fee simple of land which returned 1001. a-year, and upon pro fessional income of 1001. a-year, required little eloquence or sagacity to show that such a tax was unequal. First, it was unequal, because, as a mere money specula tion in the money market, it cost a different sum. He could go into the money market, and a portion of land that returned to Witt 100/: a year; he could sell for thirty years' purchase. If at the age of 30, in a good state of health, he ' wanted to purchase 3001. a year, the ptirchase money would be 9,000/. ; that was the ordinary price at an insuretice office. He had taken the argument at its lowest point. Something roust be added for age; and it must be recollected that the gains of trade depended net merely upon the times in which they lived, but upon fashion. He had known gentlemen in his own pro • fession, who were making a large fortune at 40, and were not worth a penny at 00, The seasons, tempests, money.panies, the folly of a neighbour, all rendered the profits of trade uncertain. When all these things Were taken into account, he thought it %mild be apparent that one=half was not too great a difference. He would, with-the permission of the Committee, draw at tention td font propositions which marked what ought to be incidental to tact ion s and when he stated that those proposi tions were laid down by Adam Smith, he was sure he would win the respectful consideration, if not the direct assent, of the Right Hoff. Baronet to them. He would give these four maxims ifi the Werile In whitit they were laid down by that great authority, leeeadstl ttitj so much better expressed than he could that to Which he wished to call the attention of the Com• iflftiee; The first proposition was, that the subjects of each Oligltit apntribute to the support of the Government as nearly as possible Ifi ffepottion to their respective abilities. Secondly, 'that the tax which each individual paid aught to be certain and not arbitrary. Thirdly, that the tax should be talseit at the thee, and in the made most convenient to the con trltiuidt!? tin* Fourthly, that each tax ought to he so con tributed as both to take and to keep out of the pockets of the people at little as possible, over and . above _w ta h e at 4, M o uld bring into the Treasury tot the- These titre pritellples of morality which ought o govern them all, party men, though th . ey . were ; and one of the first and ' , fanciest principles was, that every man who took the reins of teeernMent, ought to see that taxation upon all should be .1 seiterdtnik to their means. Suppose that the tax must be equh, - • twwould say for the sate of round num levied upon revenues. • -'..rived 1' 01. from land bers, 1001., was the man who as much and fee-simale, capable of contributing to the ss the Mate iihB had 1 . 001. income from a profession r LOPS% he indki 4 Etery man had a knowledge 9' that it oticb, 'The lattad pi4rietBr rocs least by one half flaa,tyi s 9; 410 6 e+ him iii 614 thP into s§ot the profe:siehal Man? That wai l.i Nl a iHit Tiff the lii `i pvt ve t i w o titel they tart in the satne amount illtilthli "hied . PropPetlar the than ..r l l9 tierved hit income kola his owh a(irtioLic slio 4q14; and body in the most arduous 0t,., , ,0.4 . 1 0 ,t1Ynti,iii pi4seel dean by the responsibilities of .a wife surf amt would they tax the 100/. derived by such a man from his labour, to the same extent as they would tax the 1001 derived 'by a gentleman kotts a fixed arid a certain sum? Was the merchant, whose gains were dependent on the seasons and the winds, to be taxed at the same rate as he whose Income was derived tram land? Were they who toiled for bread in the game eenditien k and were they possessed of the same ability, to contribute in the same degree to the necelsitivs of the State? If so, let' them go dantvards, anti they seLuld at last come to the labuttrer, who they all allowed was not able to contribute. He derived his daily bread front his daily toil j and he was not able to pay with those who possessed land; and therefore ho would ask whether th ey whose labour was more burdensome 1 than the hardest manual work—whose spirit, not whose mus cles, was labouring, were to be taxed to the same amount as those who were better able to pay ?—(Hear.) A great num ber of other objections were made—that the tax was a direct one, and one which the people did not like ; b ut he thought it wou ld b e improper if he then entered into the principle of the Bill: He would, therefore, confine himself to the matter in hand, arid he thought he could illustrate it in twenty thousand ways, at id bring them to b ear in a variety of wavQ. Th e issue w:s, that the tax was an its to equal one, • and,. it it was an.. unequal cue was °P.Pf° a some of . the canons laid down by ;be grsift masters o po . • • - -" • cal economy. And now, .he would ask, was there any diffi elate, in, apportioning the. tax? Where was the difficulty ?.. Every person woo derived 100/. from any vocation, trade, or profession, had• to declare ,if he derived it front fixed property. If -he deriied it from land, it was known ; from the funds, it was known ; from annuities, it was known ; but if it was derived from any trade, vocation, or profession, it was - known also ; therefore he did not see any difficulty, no matter from what source the income was derived. He . would suppose a professional man, forty i years of age, who had laid up 10,000/. in the funds at three ' per cent , New Ccnsols. He has 10,000/. as far as fixed in come was concerned. Now the tax-gatherer conies and asks him what property he has got, and he answers that he has 10,0001 in the funds, and 1,000/. a year by his profession. " Very well," says the tax-gatherer, " I will takeethree per. cent. on the return made from your 10,000/., and I will take one-and-a-half per cent. on your professional gain." The Right Hon. Baronet had tried to drive him to a corner when he first propenneed his views; he (Mr. R.) had answered him as well as he could, but he met him now by saying, It is true in this case you are right, but there are other people that I could point out that shall be equally hardly dealt with, and I will not make any distinction. Now, he would answer that by saying, that it was not a worthy answer to say that because they could not do all justice they should not de some — that because they could not do perfect justice they should do injustice. He wanted to approximate as much as he could to truth; the administration of justice was but an approxima tion to it, and he was content that it should be so ; and when he showed them a clear way to approximate to justice, he asserted that on the head of him who would not adopt that just and clear remedy would rest all the odium and responsibility ; and that odium and. responsibility would be greatly increased by the powerful situation in which the Right Hon. Baronet stood, if he unjustly taxed the people of Eng land. He hoped and bslieved that the Right lion. Baronet was desirous to relieve the people Irvin all inequality in taxation, and he *anted him to show what there was to prevent him from doing so.—( Hear, hear.) But it might be said that the matter itself was nut a perfect approximation to the truth.. The question between him and the Right Hon Baronet was this : taking the man who ale rised his income from a fee simple on lamp, taking him as the representative of a class, should he do more or less injustice by bringing all persons up to his unit—make them pay up to his unit; or should he do more justice by making others bear one fraction of that unit,' and taxing him upon those units ? He only asked for rough justice to a large class of the cummunity. He made his proposal on the ground of expediency. :Ilse Right Hon. Baronet might say that the proposal could not be carried into effect+ He might say that " tools rushed in where angels leered to tread." Let the Right Honourable Baronet show them the there were obstacles Which could not be surmounted. It he could not show that. there were such obstacles, would he be prepared to take upon himself the responsibility of rejecting a just and practicable measure ? There was nu quarrelling with party interests, here were no "horned cattle," here were no Corn laws to interfere with the principles of justice. The simple point in dispute waso whether the House was prepared to tax equally persons of unequal incomes. Hon. Gentlemen who opposed him should show either that the proposition of the Right Hon. Baronet was not unequal, or that although unequal it was not unjust, or else that,. even though unequal and un just, it was impossible to amend'the measure. lee would now move that 3bd. should be substituted for 7d. in the clause. The amendment having been put, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCJEQUER said, he was sure that, however Hon. Gentlemen might differ from the Hon. and Learned Member Who had just addressed the House, no one could find the least fault either with the arguments of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, or with the manner in which he had urged them. The Hon. and Learned Gentle man had set an example, by the moderation of his speech, which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would be happy to find more freqUently followed in that House. lie would, as well as he was able, state to the House the reasons which had induced him to take a totally different . view of the subject from the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had justly observed that in all their attempts •at legislation, however much they might endeavour to approximate to perfection, they could never hope to attain it ; and he ought therefore to recollect that when he called upon the Government no propose a tax which should press equally upon •all parties, he proposed to them to do that which no Government before had ever been able to accomplish. If in this tax the Hon. and Learned Gentleman discovered inequa lities which he could not reconcile, he should rememtser the inequalities of the taxes for which this tax was proposed as a substitute. Ti e Hon. and Leained Gentleman hart drawn a contrast between' a man deriving an income from the exercise of a profession, and a man deriving an income of equal amount from landed property, and had told them that the interest of the one man in his income was very different from the interest 1 of the other, and that the professional man ought only to be taxed on the amount of one half; but they ought to consider whether the taxation levied on articles of consumption pressed equally upon these two persons._ The professional man was at 'least called upon to pay equally with persons of the same income in the other classes of society. 1 He did not maintain that the tax was perfectly equal in its pressure, but he did maintain that on that account the tax was not unjust, and not one of which the public would have reason to complain. The tax which they were discussing would draw from the income of all a certain and limited portion, in ex change fur other taxes, to which, if the Income-tax were not imposed, they would necessarily be subject. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had drawn a picture of the risks of trade from the changes of seasons, tempests, and other causes. He :was willing that the cultivator of the soil should pay the same amount of duty as the owner of the inheritance. He had not. taken into account the blighting effects of tempest upon the 'crops. —(Hear, hear.) Now, with respect to the compa rison instituted between landed, and professional, and trading income; he was quite ready to admit, that the uncertainty in the case of trades and professions was much greater than in the case of land. But the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had for gotten to notice that there were instances in commerce in which men inherited capital, reputation, and habits of business from those who preceded them, which were equivalent to the advan tages connected with land. If they looked to some of the banking-houses in the city of London, they would find that they had descended from generation to generation, bringing to , those who succeeded large profits in addition to those which were the fruits of their own industry. Would it be fair to tax such houses as those ef Snow and Child at 30. in the pound, whilst landed property was taxed at sevenpence ?—( Hear, hear.) The public could nut approve of that distinction. The HEM. Gentleman opposite (Mr. lloebuck) would guide taktitio*. aceorkling to the maxims laid down by Adam Smith. Now the noposed tax would be brought into operation ae , cording to ttinteenaxims. It would produce more revenue to the State in proportion to theemount it raised from the poc kets of the people than any other tax, and it would be in proportion to the inetnnes of the parties fi om whatevereources they Might be derived. ti: did not agree with the Hon. Gen tleman that it tooted be right to ckatge professional incomes at one half the amount prepOses: to be taken from the incomes of the other classes at the comMutety. That would not be, according .to his (the Chanedlew of the Exchequer's) view, taxing according to the means of the parties. For those reasons he would vote against the amendment of the tians. Gentlemen. Mr. WARD appealed to the Committee to say, whether the Right Hon. Gentleman,, had in the least degree answered the speech or shaken the arguments of the Hon. Member for Bath. There was an injustice in direct taxation, and yet it was proposed in a new tax to follow this injurious system. The Right Hon. Gentlemen had picked his examples, and had taken the cases of the best paid professions, and the regular returns Of certain banks; but why did he not take the cases of almost all the prtifeseimes of life, all those which were etrugeling for existence, and on Whom the Income-tax would press heavily. Professions were extremely uncertain; a physician could not reckon on more than fifteen years of professional existence, to remunerate him for the outlay of his edueation. lie thought his Hon. Friend the Member for Bath, had suggested a com promise between two conflicting interests, and he was sure that an acquiesience in the motion would reconcile many per. sons to the tax. They should expect from the Right Hon. Baronet a better argument than had been brought forward yet. Hit Hon. Friend had not been tomehed in anj one ef the points of the proposition he had propounded. had produced great efect in that House, and it would no doubt produce a great effect out of doors. He hoped to see the motion evened. Mr. STUART WORTLEY diffsred from the ssntiments of the Hon. Member for Bath and the Hon. !Wernher who had just sat down. The views taken liy the Hon. Member for Bath had been grounded on premises altogether false, and if adopted would lead to great injustice. He would aslt the Hon. and Learned Member; could the owner of a life ioterest in Nerd —for after all, under die circumstances in which land estatet were usually held, there was nothing but a life interest—could he go into the market and sell it for the same price as he could a terminable annuity derived from other sources ?—( Hear. ) Had the Hon. and Learned .Alember so little knowledge of landed property as to suppose that the rental - of the landlord was entirely profit? There was no landed proprietor in this country who was not obliged to abandon a large portion of hie rental. With regard to Schedule A, if they lucked to page 33 cf the Bill, he would ask why were they to make a difference between the assessment of tithes and th - e income of the mer chant? He could see no justice in such a distinction. I here was no portion of the schi dule that illustrated more forcibly the fallacy of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's argument than that which followed immediately after, which imposed the tax upon owners of mines, canals, &c., &c. It was for these reasons that he felt justified in opposing the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman.—( Hear, hear.) • Mr. HAWES said that ho thought the answer to the Hon. Gentleman who just sat down was, that the tax was in itself unjust and impracticable. With regard to the income of the landlord not being equal to the rent roll he admitted it, but it was always likely to be more than the returns made. But the case put by the Hon. Member for Bath was not answered. He would put another case himself. Suppose a person had 10,C00/. in vested in land, from which he derived 3 1 ,4 per cent., and that another had 10.0001. invested in trade, from which he ob tained 12 per cent. The 10,000/. invested in land gave an income of 3501:, which at 7d. would give a tax of 101. But the mon y invested in trade gave an income of 1,2001., the tax on which ought- to be only 2d., if it was intended to make both contribute equal sums. If it were said that ho over stated or understated the interest, that would riot affect the principle of his argument. Take another case. Suppose a physician, with a WO/. a year in the market, derived from his professional labour, and taking it at the value of the Hon. Member for Bath, he would receive only 1,50111. for it, wh;le if the same were derived from land, it would be worth 3,0001. And was it fair to tax property so essentially diffe rent to the same amount?—( Cries of " Hear, hear.") Just in proportion as they made their tax unjust, they would hold otit a temptation to evade the tax; and the greater the inducement they offered to traud and immorality. The Right Hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), in oppos .,re, Karl not ing the proposition before the House, took cases of a merely exceptional character, and did not look at the general principles of trade. The general trader was subject to the same fluctua tions of circumstances and climate which affected the train's in t He begged to say that in his belief this arguments ef his mode equally ofc n. tm..... •.: 'he N ember for Bath e h n ad ah no s t ve b r e e e d i! cl i o is s il e st l i y : d iie e e a oh l .r t Hen. - out *3th; end, Mill . me. ' ' and practicableproposal arriog pieLl gdiedta a. a ims.. . . 29 41F4 /01 pet ii 6, Rits-t - 1?) - -- - assumed by the lion. 1 1 . , s;t tien was, . or by those who estially jilst 7 1 11 6Jten e l' e ker of Voitghitt, unle ss the Nlnber for tiff . s,c ttl i. ;;ri rmi t e d , eh t, tips. e d.-minting arouneente than bane. vet se64e on i‘ thi tense 5ide..,... g e le e ssei k nle hear, , mere , i • GO .6 . tin 6 % r . eut proposal, they woad been adduced iii fitemAlt• on le ~.,. ( Meo eirde. tHir considdratione adopt the atnendmen _. to care tht ii Oils: Oossible 151 anY Mr BORTIIs'IC ' u the tax ps with perfect quility) tliibn dif scheme to make his ' • • opinion no class would suffer to iik ell ferent claeses. In. ~;. . li t ' •r uriavoidable inequatity ot the tex as the sma at . mc , from the subject to all the changes of climates and ot the who, while e manentiv rated at ore-half his rent.. The lement'' " as p- r Learned - . 'would be • e el tax the on. and unequal in its operation i • • s as the tax he proposed to supplant . It woul d make the man who ;sot 6,0001, a -year from a professi on, 1 him who rofession, alike de: ived only 1501. aeyear from a p . . . d l and 41. puss Now, did not tbe former indon ua PaY. Government and. the deem s more benefit from good i the institutions of the country than the latter? a in an amend- Hon. and Learned Gentleman had moved ' to be levied at relent to the effect that the tax should begin b. . but at _mein a year, he (Mr. Borthwick) would support h i e ir , 'ng nearer 'present he would vote for the clause as it wae, e a h hold era of au to justice to small farmers, tradesmen, and t nuttics? memo.. i en7 , '" l 'Th 32F:LATIOUT.litzPE c , i 4 CI" . 11 "" r Lice question ljd()'.e ‘l"' ""'''-': • and, having given it the , importance to the whole country., h. 1 tower to votes for the fullest consideration, it was not in Is 1 '.. • .• • . ( r. ~ L'. motion of the Hon. and Learned Member fur Bath. In the. present circumstances of the events jt was running a great risk of shutting out the Government from resources which could be retorted to in • times of rianger. In - a time of diffi culty and danger, a tax like this would be le last.resort.- If they now had recourse to it, whatAtild be their means of raising revenue in a tinteof real difficulty. In 1803,. Mr. Addington proposed exemptions of trades and professions,. similar to those proposed by his hon. and Learned Friend' the Member for Bath. On that occasion Mr. Pitt said that the House ought tot to encourage one mode of empioying ca pital in preference to another. Men employed capital in va- ,; a t rious pursuits, according to their various tastes. The object „i th of the exemption at that time proposed was not so large as that e.,h which his Hon Friend, the Member for Bath, recommended. Those principles were held by both sides of the Houseeisy Mr. Fox, as wed as by Mr. Pitt; both contended that hoseever just and legal it might be to tax the funds in common with aIL all income, the instant any exceptions were permitted, it. _ became illegal and unjust. He did not deny that there were , hardships, but it was wrong to suppose that the fundholder was always an opulent man. They might as well attempt to wash a blackarnoonr white, as to make an income-tax a fair end equal tax, and that was the reason he had opposed it ; lent the House having sanctioned the principle, he could not, for one, senction any exemption, convinced as he was that if any exemption were admitted, they must end by giving it up altogether. • Sir ROBERT INGLIS, anxious as he was that tile Right Hon. Gentleman should review one portion of his weasnree could not concur in the principle on which the ion. and Learned Member for Bath advocated his motion. The Han. and Learned Gentleman's motion went to relieve one class only.' His (Sir R. Inglis's) proposition went to the relief of , the poor of all classes. He was desirous to begin' with the sum of 150/., as the amount at which taxation should com mence. If he were to bring forward his proposition as aevub etantial motion, he felt he should do so with some prospect of success. He was not desirous of . embarrassing the Wight Hon. Baronet; but he felt that it would take away a litige portion of the unpopularity from this tax, if his Right H on. .Friend would accede to his proposition. One of the letter sto which he had already adverted, stated that the income of the writer was 1551. a year ; that he had a family of thirteen clad th en ; that he was seventy-eight years of age ; that five of ; his children were dependent upon him ; but he slated that hl' thought the reduction in the tariff would compensate him for his . charge to the In te erne.tax. The pressure of taxation was most se eerely telt by those who seldom tasted butcher's meat. There share individuals veht hail no luxuries ; there were persons whonr the butler's of Hon. Gentlemen would consider had not necessaries. It was to the pourer classes that the boon of the tariff would more immediately epply. Notwithstanding that this coun try was mote aristocratical than any other, yet there was a gr eat subdivision of property. He considered that the Income- tax would press heavily on the man of 2001„ and he hoped his Right Hon. Friend would take the subject into his conside.ra time He ( Sir 11. H. Inglis) thought that the man of 200/- should be only charged upen the surplus 50i., and 2501. of 'the surplus 1001. He hoped the Right Hon. Baronet would arT,opt this coarse, as he ( Sir R. kire Inglis) believed it would relieve the tax from any unpopolarity• it might otherwise gain. fle would not make a substantive :notion, as he did not wish to embarrass his Right Hon. Fri.sr.d. He merely threw out out as a suggestion, and if it were e adopted by the Right 'Hon. Baronet, he should feel extremely gra,.'eful to him. • Mr. V. SMITH would not enter into' the question the Hon. Baronet had introduced. if he made a stehetantive motion, he (Mr. Smith) should have an opportunity Of considering the subject, and perhaps of giving it his support, if he was at all . wilting to accept it. He (Mr. Smith) rejoiced ex tremely that this question had been raised ' I V the Hon. Member for Bath on that occasion ; first, eveausa he thought that of all the debates that had taken plat.'? on that subject this one was the most damaging to the Incieene-taxe and, .secondly, becanse he could not agree with Horn, urable Gentlemen, who said that they were not to consider the mea sure in detail, but consider it as a whole. He (Mr. St pith)' considered it to be their duty to endeavour, as much as pis ashler to mitigate the evils of the Bill. He must sae- that it appeared to him to be. no answer whatever to the proposition • of the Hum. Member for Bath, that because there were siher injus.ices in the Bill, that therefore they were not to eons idea that one. Ihe Hon. Member for Bath had proposed an a 'al remedy to this evil, and it' any other Hon. Member co ail* propose' as easy a remedy for another evil, he (I' Smith) was prepared to give him his support. re (Mr. Smith) could not agree with the Hon. Member fee, 'Taunton, that this was entirely a war tax. He (Mr. Smi o' 7 • believed that if this country were engaged in an European v raft that the country would find other resources, even for that, t has an Income-tax. The Right Hon. the Chancellor of the -Ea' chequer said that the 'injustice complained of by the Fle h i?' Member Tor Bath, would apply equally to fixed incoete., * le this, he (Mr. Smith) now purposed to give a distinct dorlia l * 'the Right lion. Alember for Taunton had quoted the laniguag e i of Mr. I'itt as his argument, but he (Mr: Smith not think the argument applicable to the present ease. Pitt told them that there was no excuse of a violation of pu'te\u‘ faith in taxing the funds, but that of taxing all income equs But this was at a time when there was thegreatest need of the tax. In conclusion, he must say that when the Hon. Mew te r for Bath said that thiS was a bold and a comprehensive In ir sure that he (Mr. Smith) did not see the boldness of it, a proposed to exempt a third portion of the British Isles, and ht` did not see that it was comprehensive, as, according to ill 6 showing of the Hon. Member for Bath, a very small sum raised by an immense inconvenience to the whole native. d Sir ROBERT PEEL said he was rather surprised to fin the Hon. Gentleman who had spoken last intended to vo te with the Hon. Meinber for Bath. The Hon. Gentleihaa argued that there was a difference between trade and p fessions, and that there;was an injustice with respectici 'Or e ' fessions and trade in being taxed in the same rate as rest Pt e.- perty. The lion. Gentleman had founded his argument 011 the difficulty attending this tax. Difficulty there would be in any case, therefore it was quite clear that the 1 i H e Gentleman could not support the Hon. Member for Bath. (Sir Robert Peci)' thought it was highly deeirable to eow flue themselves simply to the matter before the Flour; viz., whether it was just—assuming the principle upon whi c h the House had determined to act, viz., to raise the deli to, ie the revenue by a tax or income—whether it was fittings; make a distinction according to the sources of inceemeh l . hht would make .one or two observations on the vote the * l a t h Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Labouchere) intended to give . 0 ", ase . question. He (Mr. Labouchere) assumed for the sake m oot gument, that it was right, in imposing an Income-taah 'we you ought to make a di fference in the sources of inc esee - ''s 3 understood). He ( Sir It. Peel) retained his opinion- 'hit t Lad to raise three IDi:lions and a half, or four miliions, under present circumstances of the country, that there was u 0 rae a sure by which that sum could be raised with less into river ence and embarrassment to the community than by a Pro' perty-tax, and its far from the discussions which had tskr, m place having affected the conclusion which he had prey: tit drawn, he : believed that no easur e would be attendel ' si s . ah less injustice than that would. The Right Hon. Gen tle h i b, had quoted from a work written by Mani n th This motion referred to those propositions to which th e L e n Gentleman referred, for the purpose of showing that a taiehrhth income was more just to all classes, and more particitia r lht. the consuming classes of the . country, than taxes on e tit: if tore or any ether tax; and he (Sir R. Peel) must say I" the fen had attempted to increase the window -tax, or the i tax, or the assessed taxes, the peculiar class which wotllo , s be been mainly subject to the burdens of those taxes aoul Lt h e those who derived their income from professional pursuits; 'lite he would say that this tax was preferable to those best Rai wealthy man, who could withdraw himself from the countrYh a t hee escape those taxes, but with regard to an Income-tax, wuhoile• he retired or no lie could not escape from its operation , _ votte .• that single exception, he ( Sir R. Peel) expressed his 0° o re, rence in the optmons of the Hon. Gentleman, and he was on, whether the Hon. Gentleman took the popular or the y pular course,,there was no man in that House who adopts had course with more constahntious motives. Such conduct ;1., marked the whole of the Hon. Gentleman's life.--(athe hear. ) He would now address himself to the argument ' 1 ; hos Hon. and Learned Gentleman, He spoke very warmly ,got great responsibility edicts was to devolve upon him (Sir I: eh eV reel) personally for the decision to which the House e •be come. He (Sir R. Peel) could .a..sure him that whe l _ t h ile had come to a conalusion on any particular . e 7, h op he was perfectly prepared to bear a 2.1 the responn eta The Hon. and Learned Gentleman agreed With him ''art Income-tax, subject to modifications, was on the wh i ° ei e fie most just tax that could be imposed. The Hon. atid e '7 Or s Gentleman made a proposition fur the exemption 'N th , e . !‘? l • classes, but he did not p. opose to remedy any one ht i its ~ rl , to which this tax was subject in consequence of its idel%'n'teir'; character. The inquisition into incomes derived freg had: th sions or trades must be the same, whether they levieo;3etli v lot, in the pound. For the purpose of levying small sir e ttlua c ' inquiaition would be just the same as for thvying large ess' and no pert of the objection to this tax in that reshe' , ,en: • remedied by his proposal. His proposal simply . eas tu_ a ., tain incomes derived in a certain way should be in port,eh from the Income-lax. He ( Sir R. Peel) objected to i h u;, position,. because he believed that the plan proposed by tof (government was much less objectionable „ s ae He (Sir R. Peel) postponed to levy a tax on the w7 iht .:3r, the income of this coutary to supply the deficiette_l ip revenue, but at the same time to make en a bateniehoht2l,!, cost of articles of consumption, in the hope of besle os m ae ll . "o; classes of the cemmuuity, more particularly. °f .0 0 '1 e d those of whom the Honourable and Learned Gentleins',oo advocate.--(Hear.) The other night the Honoirho-Cel'e Learned Gentleman appeared to admit the justice ot i coh t t o R. Peel's) proposal ; but if any distinction whateverroy 0,0 made, it ought to be on account of the pennant' . rea l is : ° O. tenure ; and when he went on to show the differencer°_lthe perty, with rtopect to the permanency of the te e nh iet e nt a of Gentleman appeared t 3 agree with him, but h u _ eti eney"'is6 now ; he would not now look at the Oer"' wh ha th' h e the tenure, but he said now that he ehte ht "Ls. the Income-tax, but lie would partially 8. tf% r;11 who derived thir incomes from professions e e% ri , The Government proposed, to levy 7d. pr in opi.. t .u h e_, .: f.hi T s h il e " e lands, tenements, and hereditament; in Great arita, lu 'of 511 e„e'hrese Gentleman said, that he would take the in fee simple, and he would compare /he va! Te e e. Geeh a to with the professional man's income ; but the L_Thhe >A their was not at liberty to- do that. He •h u an seli f a " life' the owners of fee simple, " you `' e hoee e c hhea 4 u estate for twice the value for which the J o h , G hat y our interest could sell his." Not at all ; ,advi t_h its e thkuo P fu: , ut it te e h i itie. W :.::::ret a oTo t o l did not apply this test, but be said, e no oh' e i e ct to a o teal interest in landed property, you all shall be sahe:t ree l' date able and equalised contribution." He (Sir lie` - h t 7a• fer oce subjected sums of estate and fee-simple to a taiany, ; C o 0 1° p p s, to r o . held his property at the will of his landlord—, w hose I „ t ore months' notice , no t' n hiutotinhtmelit tit : l et t i e baher ho,tarudhr subjected sedproouite r atyt ; t s l i ixn e im t y e ,o n bn a e‘ n . b t depended on the vicissitudes of the. seasantvw ee t he ; et , i, in his property at all—not half such a tenure 071 the d, _or , ttphiecalra,wyherc,ara.hn)edarlz_staahtide, You shall PaY the 1.i 0 • , the r o a f t e t hoef hbuuld o b f e t s,ih T ,.!e l i u t e b t o t e u t annuities, they had determined that he thea man who o P u ay esti 7 o d n . , tinhat.lo 'be su b j ect e t • ° ere a e si of annuity in an assurance office s hout , re __, s te.n wire wh at "ide in the pound. If the Hon. Gen ; t e _ t _ e a t i` ane i Then One, he should have to go into the tnterettes• x . Ttinh was the difference in the value of the, _ f W ce, w i t hou er all Pay ha T d he soaL l"s he was about to subject the l i olclers,°': . n t he pen , to 1 9 -7 —( Hear, hear)—to the payment oi t o reili t c ause was about . a t ho holding offices during pleasure he once tt letY a . from t, o in the pound. If the ju dgi n g las • prevail, he should think, t hose Ve lies 1 ose v' tia were to s late years, that hter.) A il " v arious experience co ..(Cheers and laug v . c _ and sh e wa in! . yetweleet.erntiece, ewe daloted , their abilities to a l a ; on to pay • T a ke the h sell in a,nr c e l i t e ah v - . l s i_ tu e l i l t e h h o . half a - ) Pay' t " I• Psu h rt a a ,e l ° o f t pay, and it was propos d deriv rtc;v7lllddat:seretnixeiensilts't;o:e mutt" Puct:ietiwilr:doed _7li_frzw, their they alum triillit.eal4lll;n iaV4°liiefet.tnY.eocrottiethi Reduce g h tl c e , t) that if in 11., on the amount o t o held Plus -,- did subject income o with Oa a-year, w,' a , tithes. 150 , subjected clergymen w character such h h am : , a , subjected tit ss rY doubt of a permanent short_if t h e y 514 . . 0 _ a dons in the public s e f r t vh i e s - k . rtie to a tax of 7d. t w i iic h they sublthatet there l u ' different instances the P t „ .01 whose . tenure cl ing with them a more of justice in sub} .neo en i me from trade, ,s t . ' i ' t •rh ; was he s h : e a l t i b i ewnicntuil raver' v t - sl r.tYs:c-uar_eiLly,af t.'..ey •IT be eae pt, v.hoir g t. 2 111).1 Oa' amount of dut/ tmoenannzei,qiuhailayrawtheoofdpc:iti.i.nir4i,.bhui.tieo.7l:ebTeteal:el: .;,at ml, rr• the amid f a cc il tshiens,pelecl,aislsees:oura ta4 .— if they al ow e the prc certain sidered and sav 'spent he coul rebourc, State - . the case Than, ‘,„ (Lurd . _ taxation the ba the sha; T.reasui 'persuad svas suc ke. II klouse more t 1 fallen I assume e 4 hey u 11 0 all lAade e ne (:01)! in ends liable 4iLle at tt, C Of fal; notice used .tlasses ~• rep ru , pia fal of the right 1 trade rived equal] com e lion n to the THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY MORNING, AP ,1 :30, 1842