The Sun. — London, England, 1854-03-22 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PA lILIAMLN 1%. - • OUSE OF LORDS--(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. The Marquis of BREADALBANE presented peti tions from the Haddington burghs, and other places in Scotland, against the endowment of Roman Catholic • • chaplains to prisons. The Earl of CLANCARTY called attention to a case at the last Armagh assizes, in which two men were charged with the brutal murder of a man named Wilson, but in consequence of a compromise on the part of the counsel who appeared for the Crown, were only found guilty of manslaughter, and sentenced to six months' imprisonment. He thought the case called for some ex • planation by the Government. He gave notice that, on this day fortnight, he should move for copies of the in dictment and the conviction of the two prisoners. SEAMEN FOR THE BALTIC FLEET. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH inquired whether it was true as announced in the newspapers, that the Go vernment intended to engage able seamen for the Baltic fleet for a year certain ; and if so, at what wages? The Earl of ABERDEEN was understood to reply that the Government did propose to accept seamen for one year's service, and at a rate of wages exactly the same as if engaged for five years certain. The Earl of. ELLENBOROUGH pointed out the in convenience of their term of service expiring precisely at the moment when they would be required next year, and when they would, if again wanted, be able to make their own terms with the Government. He likewise complained of the coastguard on board the fleet being paid more than the able-bodied seamen. The Earl of ABERDEEN said the experiment was undoubtedly a novel one, but as it had only been re solved upon within the last forty-eight hours, it was pre mature to discuss its propriety now. It was thought that seamen would be more ready to engage for one than five years ; but at the same time, when fairly entered upon such service, it was not at all unlikely that they would continue in it. The experiment, in his opinion was well worth attempting, and he hoped it would be more successful than the noble lord antici pated. (Hear, hear.) FRAUDS UPON THE COMMISSARIAT. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH referred to a letter in a morning journal stating that a person who had contracted to supply hay for the cavalry horses intended for the East, had been guilty of a gross fraud, by filling the inside of the trusses with shavings, rotten straw, and other materials, and in 'quired whether, if the statement were true, the Govern ment intended to inflict any punishment upon the individual. The Duke of NEWCASTLE said he was sorry and ashamed to state that the facts mentioned.by the noble earl were substantially correct, with the exception that the fraud had been detected by the Government officers, and not, as alleged, by the man's servant " splitting," and telling the truth. He was afraid the law did not apply to the case, but ,he had communicated with the So licitor of the Treasury with reference to it ; and consider ing the flagrant nature of the offence, and the serious consequences which might have resulted from it, if not discovered, the Government would deal with the offender with the utmost severity which the law allowed. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH thought if the law did not meet the case it might so be alte ed without de lay. After a few words from Lord BROUGHAM, The Earl of DERBY trusted that the Government would not hesitate to divulge the name of the party, in order that he might be laid open to public execration. The Duke of NEWCASTLE hoped the Government would be able to inflict upon him a more serious punish ment than the publication of bis name. The Earl of MALMESBURY also urged upon the Government the propriety of mentioning the name of the individual. The Duke of NEWCASTLE said the name of the party was Sturges. The subject then dropped. The Valuation (Ireland) Act Amendment Bill was read a second time. The following bills were read a third time and passed : The Mutiny Bill, the Marine Mutiny Bill, the Exche quer Bills (1,750,0001.) Bill, the Commons' Inciosure Bill. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS-(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a third time and passed : —Liverpool Police Superannuation Fur.d, Scarborough Market, Warrington Improvement and Market. The following bills were considered and agreed to : Kingston-upon-Hull Docks, Nottingham Waterworks, Rossendale Waterworks. The Stourbridge Waterworks Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed. On the motion for the second reading of the Canada, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia Railway Bill, • Mr. BOUVERIE moved that the bill be read a second time this day six months. After a brief discussion, the amendment was agreed to and the bill thrown out. PETITIONS. • Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE presented a petition from Sir George Brown, praying that in the event of a public prosecutor being appointed, he may have power to deal with offences against joint-stuck companies. Sir J. DUKE presented a petition fr•on one of the city barristers egainst the Poor Removal Bill. Mr. SPOONER presented several petitions from Warwickshire against the alteration of Oaths' Bill. Mr. HADFIELD presented a petition from 4,180 inhabitants of Sheffield against the Medical Registration Bill. DUNGARVON ELECTION. Sir G. GREY . brought up the report of the General Committee of Elections appointing the following com mittee to try the merits of the petition complaining of an undue return for the borough of Dungarvon :—Mr. J. H. Bailey, Hon. Henry Brand, Capt. Gladstone, Mr. W. P. Price, and Mr. Napier (chairman). PROTESTANT CHURCH IN PARIS. On the motion of Mr. WISE, the following return was ordered :—" Address for copies or extracts of the correspondence which passed between the Foreign office, the late Lord Granville, and the late Bishop Lus combe, relating to and preceding the erection by the latter, at his own expense, of the episcopal church at Paris, and to the use of the same by the British Ambas sador for a period of 17 years, free of any expense either to the Government or the ambassadors. Of all correspondence, or extract of the same, between the late ambassador at Paris, the An hbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of London, and the Rev. William Chamier, re specting the use of Mr. Chatnier's episcopal church by the British embassy, or of any right thereto claimed by the ambassador, or relating to the circumstances which determined the ambassador to discontinue his attend. ance at that church, and to recommend the use of the ball-room, and subsequently the dining-room, as places of worship, and an account of the expenses created thereby or relating thereto. Of the nomination of the present chaplain to the British embassy at Paris, and of all correspondence between the Foreign-office and the ambassador, showing - the necessity for such appoint ment after the lapse of four years during which time the duties of divine public service was per formed without any expense to the Government. Of any information communicated by the present ambassador as to the number of British families residing at Paris, and to the existing accommodation in the churches and chapels of the Church of England already erected there for the use of English residents and visitors ; and, of any correspondence that has taken place with the present ambassador at Paris, relative to the erection of a projected churoh in that city, or in relation to the subscription for that purpose ; and also of any report made in reference to the proposed church ; and the site thereof, to the Foreign Department or to the Board of Works." UNIVERSITY OF DUBLIN. Mr. FAGAN gave notice that this day fortnight he should move for leave to bring in a bill to improve and extend the University of Dublin. BALTIC FLEET. Colonel HERBERT asked the First Lord of the Ad miralty whether an official notice in the Times of Satur day, relative to the rate of postage of letters for officers of the Baltic fleet, is correct ; and, if so, whether Go vernment are prepared to reduce such charge when the mails are conveyed in hei Majesty's ships of war com missioned as such. Sir J. GRAHAM said , the subject was now under consideration, and he was in hopes that a considerable reduction w T ROOPS be made in the postage. FOR THE EAST. Colonel BLAIR asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether there is any foundation for the report which has appeared in the public journals, stating that a gross fraud has been practiced in the forage contract for horses going to the East ; and if it be true, whether the Government have any , power to inflict punishment on the offending parties further than by the loss of their contract. Sir J. GRAHAM said such a fraud was attempted but not completed. • , Colonel BLAIR asked i f the party guilty of the at tempt would be punished. Sir J. GRAHAM said the Government had no power to punish beyond cancelling the contract. TOWN AND COUNTY POLICE. Mr. FITZROY gave notice that on an early day the noble lord at the head of the Home Department would move for leave to bring in a bill to itn prove the system of police in the counties and boroughs of England and Wales. MILITARY KNIGHTS OF WINDSOR. Mr. GRENFELL moved an address to her Majesty, that she will be graciously pleased forthwith to direct the Lieutenant and Chancellor of the Most Noble Mili tary Order of St. George and the Garter to take the necessary steps for the due appropriation of the rents and profits, called "The New Dotation, 'granted by the three existing Crownts of the 4th day of August, 1547, the 7th day of OctOt., 1547, and the 30th day of Aug., 1559, for the maintenance and other exigencies of the Military Knights of Windsor, as established by the two acts of Parliament 39th and 40th Elizabeth, c. 9, and Ist James, c. 31, and further established by the act 3d and 4th Vic., c. 113. The Dean and Chapter of Wind sor held these lands in trust for the Military Knights, but, instead of appropriating- the whole of the rents to the use of the Mili tar y Kni g hts, they simply paid them is. a day each, and applied the rest to their own private purposes. Now that was most unjust, and he therefore called upon the house to take the step that he proposed for investigating the claims of the military knights which were band upcna a deed hearing date the 4th of ~, TITE SUN,ZIOND - ON, WEDNESDAY F ! )171:[1ING, ng, 1e64, nation to support their Sovereign and her Ministers in the 'demands which they might make. But I must re mind the house that within—l cannot say a few days, for it is almost still a few hours, other documents connected with those important transactions have also been placed upon our table ; and, to say the least of them, they add much important as well as increased information to that which we already possessed as to the reasons which have placed the country in the perilous position in which it now finds itself. It was not in our power, however, to con sider those documents when we listened first to the finan cial plans of the Minister. The financial plans of the Minister, when, a fortnight ago or snore, they were pro posed for our consideration and acceptance, were founded np6n a necessity which, so far as the House of Commons was concerned, was only explicable by the papers which were placed upon the table on the first day of the session. Rat the important supplement to those papers has ap• peared since that statement— in fact, within only the last 48 hours—and no one can read that important supplement without feeling that its perusal must give rise to new con siderations, which could not have been open to us when we listened to the reasons of the Minister for his extraor- Binary proposition for increased taxation ; that that im portant supplement has given a very new aspect to the circumstance which we supposed were entirely placed before us, and that the opinion of Parliament must neces sarily be given upon that new matter thus unexpectedly brought before our notice. (Hear.) I say this, Sir, because I wish to guard myself in the course of which I am taking to night from any approval of the proposition ; which is brought forward by her Majesty's Ministers. It is impossible that we can bring curselves to approve a propo sition for greatly increasing the direct taxation of the cowl try, unless we have a clear case of necessity proved to us ; I say that we have not a clear necessity proved to us at pre sent, when we have two sets of papers before us which con vey to our minds different and distinct impressions. Nor can I forget, sir, tb at it was not to theliberality, not to the generous confidence of the Government—that we are indebted for that additional and more important portion of this infor mation. (Hear, hear.) Xis, I will not say to an accident but to circumstances of a very rare, if not anunprecedented nature, that the House of Commons is indebted for being acquainted with the real causes of the war in which we ' were invited to embark some weeks ago, upon a very dif ferent statement from that which probably will ultimately be substantiated, and upon which we were asked greatly to increase the burdens of the country. I am sure that I gentlemen on both sides of the house must feel that this subject requires discussion, which it cannot receive upon the present opportunity ; that they must feel that before we ultimately sanction this increase of our taxation we must require from the Ministry a more clear account of the causes which have brought about the present state of affairs, and that Parliament, much more formally, muck snore decidedly, and, I will even say, more solemnly must sanction that policy and that increased taxation than it has heretofore done. (Hear, hear.) So far, therefore, as the main project is concerned, I shall treat all these stages of the proceeding as merely preliminary and formal. I guard myself from in any way or in any degree approving thl) proposal which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has brought forward. I will not admit that there is any ne cessity for increased taxation upon the present occasion, and for this simple reason—that I myself am utterly at a loss to know whether we are going to war—(" Oh, oh !") —and, if we are going to war, what are we going to war for? (Hear, hear.) Ido not want to invite any discus sion upon the subject. All I want is, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or any other Minister, shall not say, upon a subsequent occasion, such as the second reading of the bill upon the income-tax, that we are precluded from objecting to the polic.y which this bill wishes to bring into action. I rose to-night because there were one or two points connected with the financial policy of the right hon. gentleman respecting which, on a former occasion, there had been some discrepancy of opinion and statement between him and myself in this house. Perhaps the house will recollect that upon the evening that he made his financial statement, and after it was made, there was some conversational discussion in the committee between the right hon. gentleman and myself upon matters of fact, upon which there was a great difference of statement be tween us. But they were subjects which could not be settled without reference to authentic documents not then at hand. The right hon. gentleman upon a subsequent oc casion in a Committee of Supply, upon the Wednesday fol lowing, I think, took the opportunity of making a fresh statement upon one of the points of controversy; but, as the right t, on. gentleman rose very shortly before the house, as it was Wednesday morning, was necessarily obliged to adjourn, as it was impossible for me to reply to the right hon. gentleman upon that occasion without entirely stop ping the course of public business; I expressed to the right hon. gentleman that I dissented from his statement, but that I would not, of course, at that moment intrude myself upon the committee. It was then within a few minutes of 6 o'clock, and it was distinctly understood between us that upon a subsequent occasion I should notice the state ment which he then made. Now, when the right hon. gentleman made his financial statement, upon which I at the time offered no observations, so far as his main propo sition of increasing the taxation of the country was con cerned, reserving to myself the right of so doing upon a fit opportunity—which unfortanately has not yet happened— I did make some observations upon what I thought was a very important feature of our financial condition. I thought it my duty to call the attention of the Committee of Ways and Means to a subject which attracted much of the pub- .. lic attention, and occupied that evening a great portion of the time of the house—namely, the state of the pub lic balances in the Exchequer. (Hear, hear.) I felt it my duty to remind the committee upon that occasion, that, when the Government of Lord Derby quitted office at the beginning of January, 1853, they left a balance in the Exchequer of nearly 9,000,000/. P and that, at the commencement of the present year of 1854, the balance of nearly 9,000,0001. was reduced to the sum of about 4,400,0001. I pointed out then to the committee the great inconvenience and possible injury to the public service of such a state of balances in the public Exchequer. I said that, so far as I could form an opinion at the time when I was speaking, which must have been somewhat about the beginning of this month, the balances in the Exchequer were not more than 1,500,0001., and that it was possible that, by the end of the financial year which is now impend ing (the sth of April) the balances might be increased to 3,000,0001., which I thought, myself, a liberal estimate. I have heard to-night from the high authority of a gentle man who is a political supporter of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and who recently filled, and filled with great efficiency, the high post of Governor of the Bank, that in his opinion I rather understated my case. I said then "if upon the sth of April you have 3,000,0001. balance in your Exchequer, and upon that day or about it you have to pay between 6,000,0001. and 7,000,0001. interest upon the national debt, have to meet upwards of 2,000,0001. more of your South Sea payments, and have also to supply the usual expenditure of the country, it appears to me that you are in a position of extreme difficulty—that even in ordinary times it would be a perilous and imprudent one, but that in times like the present, times of war and times of great financial difficulty consequent upon war, your position is not only wanting in prudence, but may even be perilous." (Hear, hear.) I think that every gentleman must feel, whatever may be his views upon the subject, that it is a subject well deserving the attention of the House of Commons. I think that every gentleman must feel that a great change in the management of our pub lic policy is a financial feature which demands attention, and requires considerable reflection. (Hear, hear.) Not with any intention to dwell upon the financial schemes of the right hon. gentleman—which, indeed, upon that occa sion I dwelt upon much more lightly and with much leas detail than I might have done—but merely to explain the reasons why that great metamorphosis had occurred, why that burdened Treasury had suddenly been placed in the position of being sustained by actual loans from the Bank, as is proved by the returns upon our table, 1 touched upon the causes of that great change—upon the causes which had converted a balance, in January, 1853, of nearly 9,000,0001., into a balance, in January, 1854, of 4,400,0001. I said that the cause was the dealing—as I thought, the injudicious dealing—of the right hon. gentleman with the, interest of the unfunded and of the funded debt. (Hear, hear.) I said that I could have traced to operations of his, which I thought unauthorised, and which certainly have been unsuccessful, the present state of the balances in our Exchequer ; and that, therefore, to those operations ulti mately must be attributed the inconvenience and injury which might possibly accrue from that state of affairs. Now, sir, I said upon that occasion, dealing first of all with the reduction of the duty upon the unfunded debt or Exchequer-bills, that the right hon. gentleman, when in February, 1853, he resolved to reduce the interest upon the unfunded debt, took a course which was quite unau thorised—that there many indications at that time which should have told the right hon. gentleman that he was embarking in a very dangerous enterprise; and that I was sure that in resolving to pursue it he was, in fact, acting against the advice of the best authorities upon subjects of this description. (Hear, hear.) I might have gone into much detail to prove that position; but, wishing to avoid it, and not being supplied at that time with the informa tion in an officia or authentic form, which was necessary to substantiate that statement, which I thought would be un questioned, I said from memory that the price of the pub lic funds at the time might have been an indication to the right hon. gentleman that a change was occurring in the value of money. I said at the beginning of February—on the Bth, I think— that there had been a continuous--not to say a considerable—fall in the price of the funds in the interval which had occurred from the retirement of Lord Derby from the Government, and from the moment which the right hon. gentleman had chosen to reduce the interest upon Exchequer-bills, which had already been once re duced by his predecessor. (Hear.) I said that even six weeks did not elapse between the time when we left office, I and until the right hon. gentleman advertised the reduc tion of the interest upon Exchequer-bills, before there had been that continual depreciation in the value of the Three per Cent. Consuls, which alone ought to have made a pru dent man hesitate before he contemplated a reduction of the interest upon the unfunded debt. (Hear, hear.) But at the same time I begged the house to remark that I did not pledge myself accurately to the truth of the details of the numbers, but that the fall might be nearly described by numbers such as these :—That the Three per Cents. in December, when we left office, were 1011, and that the Three per Cent. Consols at the time the right hon. gentle man reduced the interest on the unfunded d e bt —namely, on the Bth of February—were about 99 i . That was the statement that I made, and which I dare say is fresh in the memory of hon. gentlemen who now listen to me. (Cheers from the Opposition.) Well, and what was the answer of the Chancellor of the Exchequer? The right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer seemed quite offended that Thad presumed to speak of the state of the balances in the Exchequer, (Cheers.) He treated it quite as if I had made a personal attack upon him, but I am not aware that either in my matter or my manner there was anything to give rise to that suspicion. It seemed, however, to the right hon. gentleman that my noticing the state of the balances was a personal offence to him. I said there had been a continuous, not to say continual, fall in the public funds from the time that Lord Derby's Govern ment left office until the time that the right hon. gentle man reduced the interest on the Exchequer-bills, and I said that this fall was a fall of Li per cent. in the Three per Cents. between December and February. Why, the Chan cellor of the Exchequer was not contented with denying that fall in the Three per Cents. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER here made an erbservation which was inaudible. Mr. DISRAELL—I will tell you what the right hon. gentleman said. He said, " There is a fall of 14 per cent. in Consols, but I can explain it ; it is susceptible of easy explanation. Is the right hon. gentleman ignorant that a particular process is going on in the 3 per Cents, between December and February—that a person holding 1001. stock receives at that period 11.10 s. interest, which is exactly the li per cent. which describes the continual fall in the funds." There is not a gentleman who heard the Chancellor of the Exchequer who must not recollect that statement—(cheers) —there is not a gentleman who can forget that happy re tort, that triumphant repartee, or the enthusiastic cheers which the right hon. gentleman received from the friends around him. (A laugh.) Why, sir, I should have shrunk into the ground unless I had hap en ed to know that I wasexactly right, (A, laugh,)l have here the au- thoritative and official statement- of the price of the 'Three" per "Cent; Consors: 'Now, I must . °baffle that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had made upon the even ing in question an amicable remark to his right honourable colleague the President of the Board of Trade. I recol lect that he was the friend--the ,fides Acluttes, to use a classical quotation—of the right hon. gentleman—(a laugh)—and he it was who obtained the information for the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He disappeared ; he re appeared with a red book under his arm, and he " No- The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER — thing of the sort." (A laugh.) Mr. DISRAELI -Well, -whether I am right or wrong in this conjecture it has nothing to do withthe priceof Con sols. (Hear.) That is the question, and here I have the authoritative return of the price of Consols in Decem ber and at the beginning of February. The right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in answer to my statement that there had been a continuous fall in the price of Consols to the amount of 14 per cent., explained that fall, as I have said, by stating that it was occasioned by the payment of the dividend—(cheers)—that, of course, as there was a payment of 14 per cent. in January, that would explain the reason why the price in February was le per cent. less than in December. (Hear.) Now, what was I to do in order to ascertain whether my statement was correct or not ? Why, 1 must obtain from the highest authority the price of Consols in December, ex dividend, and the price of Consols in February. Every gentleman will agree that that was the proper way. (Hear.) Well, I have got that. I have got the price of Consols upon the unfortunate day on which, I believe, I resigned the seals. I have got the price of Consols, ex. dividend, on the 27th of December, and the price of Consols on the Bth of February, the day on which the Chancellor of the Ex chequer reduced the interest on the unfunded debt. It appears that the price of Consols ex. dividend on the 27th of December was 101, and that the price of Consols on the Bth of February, ex dividend, was 994, so that the fall in the Three per Cent. Consols, from the end of December to the day when the right hon. gentleman announced the reduction of interest on the unfunded debt, was not 14 per cent., and which fall the right hon. gentle. man explained by the payment of the dividend, but was really 11 per cent. (Cheers.) But, besides the official re turns, I have a return here from a quarter not official, but which in these days is as well-informed as any public office in the kingdom, for it is the Times newspaper. (Laughter and cheers from the Opposition.) Here I find in the Times of the 27th of December, 1852, in the city article, written on Monday evening—" There was not much business in the English funds be-day, and, although the market opened with firmness, the closing prices show a decline. Consols were first quoted at 101 ex dividend, andtheyleft off at 1004 to i." Then on January 3, 1853, I find : ' The English funds remain without the slightest variation. Consols for the opening were quoted 1004 to f, ex. div. throughout the day." In fact, Console had been sick throughout the whole week—(a laugh)—and had been on a continuous de cline. On the 7th of January the Tinsel city article said : " The English funds opened this morning at the lower prices of yesterday, and experienced a further decline of an eighth," upon an announcement to which I am going to allude presently. " The first quotation of Consols for money was 100 e to g, and they closed at 1008 to 4." And so they went on falling, until we find them by the official list upon the sth of February, 1853, as low as 994, a fall of 14. Now, let the house recollect, because they will sym pathise with me, that this is the only opportunity that I have had for more than a fortnight to notice that extraordi nary statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer—which the right hon. gentleman said was not a statement — and to show that that fall in the price of Consols between December and February, and which I have proved was caused by the imprudence of his conduct, was not really occasioned by the payment of the dividend. The right hon. gentleman in replying to me was happy and affluent in un necessary taunts. He said I had remarked that the funds had fallen 14 per cent. after the Government of Lord Derby resigned office, and he wondered my modesty did not in duce me to connect cause and effect, and to tell the house that it was in consequence of the resignation of Lord Derby's Government that the fall in the Consols had taken place. Well, sir, I have some modesty, I hope. (Much laughter.) lam not prepared to say that it was absolutely in consequence of the retirement of Lord Derby's Govern ment that that fall of 1A per cent, took place. But this I have no hesitation in saying—that if the country had been the least aware of what the retirement of Lord Derby's Government would lead to—(hear, hear)—if it had been possible to conceive what has occurred during the last six months—(cheers)—and the position in which we are now placed—l have no doubt that a fall of 14 per cent. would have been but a very moderate and modest estimate of what the opinion of the public would have been ; and the present state of the funds is, I think, rather germane to that point. (Cheers from the Opposition.) But when the Chancellor of the Exchequer turns round and uses un seemly and discourteous taunts—and not only uses un seemly and discourteous taunts—but, as' I have shown, makes statements which are quite unauthorised—when he attempts to twist a reference to the price of funds into a perversion for an unworthy object which served his purpose that evening, I beg to ask whether the state of the public funds was the only test that as a prudent and cautious administrator of the public funds he ought to have observed? (Cheers.) I say that a more rash, a more improvident, and a more super ficial course was never taken; and that it was not the con duct of a wise and prudent man not to condescend to notice a fall of 1j per cent. in the interval before adver tising the reduction in the interest on Exchequer-bills. (Cheers.) But were there no other symptoms that ought to have made you pause, and which would thus have pre vented you from coming forward now and saying that you are the victim of circumstances that could not be foreseen,? Why, on the 7th of January a significant circumstance took place. On that day, when the Consols were very sick, this was the alleged cause—namely, the raising of rate of discount by the Bank. The rate of discount had, up to that moment, remained unaltered since the 22d of April, 1852, but it was raised from 2 per cent. to 24 per cent. on the 7th of January. (Hear, hear.) Well, was not that a significant symptom ? (Hear.) Was that a sign to be disregarded ? Was not that a circumstance to be taken in connection with the price of public funds? (Hear.) But, is that all? The Bank of England raised the rate of discount frotn 2 to 24 per cent. on the 7th of January, while the Chancellor of the Exchequer was making his great schemes s for reducing the interest on the unfunded debt. In the same month, on the 23d of Jan uary, what did the Directors of the Bank of England do ? They again met and again raised the rate of discount from 2i per cent. to 3 per cent. Twice in the month did these gentlemen, meeting in the Bank parlour, raise the rate of interest, which had remained nearly a year at a fixed rate. Were these not symptoms to be taken into ac count? (Hear.) After a continual depreciation of the price of the funds, and after a rise in the rate of discount twice in one month, is the Chancellor of the Exche quer to turn round and treat it as a matter of im pertinence that I should allude to the fact that there were symptoms in' the state of the money market at that time, which a wise man would not have disregarded. But is even that all? I will not touch upon the subject of the Exche quer balances, because I know that is a subject upon which the right hon. gentleman, although a great master of self control, does not so much keep his temper as a - public man ought to do. (Cheers and laughter.) But the premium upon Exchequer-bills, which as a great supporter of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the hon. member for Lam beth (Mr. Williams) had stated was at 70s. in December, had declined to 555. at the moment when the right hon. gentleman was determining to reduce the interest on Ex chequer-bills. It does seem to me the strangest thing when Exchequer-bills, from being at 70s. premium in December, had fallen to 555. in February, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should say the best thing we can do is to re duce the interest upon Exchequer-bills; and it really re quires one to be initiated into the mysteries of that high finance of which we hear so much before we can appreciate its adroitness. (Laughter.) It is perfectly open to finan ciers of the school of the hon. member for Lambeth to say that, because Exchequer-bills are at 70e. premium, you must immediately reduce the interest, and, if possible, cancel so dangerous an instrument ; but, as ho has been, I believe, told to-night, and ought to have been told long ago, the interest of Exchequer -bills is no test or sign of the real state of the interest which money commands, and that in moments of exigency, when money becomes precious and the interest high, men seek an investment in Exche quer-bills because they are doubtful what the future will turn out to be, and because they can command a capital for what they are risking. I say, sir, without go ing into the question whether 70s. is too high a premium for Exchequer - bills to range at or not, which may be a matter of controversy, th a t a Ch an cellor of the Exche quer, who commences reduci ng th e i n terest upon the un funded debt when there has been a reduction in the pre mium of fully 15s, during the preceding six weeks, may be most able, and may ultimately prove most successful; but he is, in my opinion, a very daring Chancellor of the Ex chequer. (Cheers from the Opposition.) The right hon. gentleman was indignant the other night, after his financial shown s t a tement, because I mad e a pass i ng o b ser vation that I th o ught there wore sympt oms at th e ti me h e commenced re d uc ing the interest on th e un f un d e d d e bt w hi c h wou ld have • the House that there were such s ymptoms—(cheers)—and I think I have it manthatpause. I think I have shown the statement which I made as to the fall of the Three per Cent. Consols was not that i gno rant and unauthorised st a t emen t w hi c h th e Chancellor of the Exchequer wished to impress upon the house that it made a cautious was, an d which at tempt his i mme di a t e supporters so enthu siastically but so rashly cheered. (Hear.) I think, if, as I have shown, the rate of interest was twice raised in the Bank Parlour in the same month, that that was rather an important symptom, and one which ought not to have been disregarded, and if the interest or the premium of his own Exchequer-bills were rapidly falling, that that was another symptom, and such a one as ought not to have been overlooked. (Cheers.) But, after all, we come to graver circumstances than these—circumstances which would have caused a prudent man to hesitate in embarking in that singular campaign in which the Chan cellor of the Exchequer commenced his career as a Minister of Finance, but which car eer i s not yet terminate d . Wh a t made Consols fall ? What made the premium on Exchequer bills decline ? What made the cautious but alarmed direc tors of the Bank meet twice in one month, after the rate of interest had been fixed, and raise the rate of dis count? that is the question. But what, sir, was the gravest of all symptoms—the symptom which ought always to occupy the attention of a Minister of Finance, the symp tom which should not be - neglected by any individual who lives in this country, having its cause at heart, and who is interested in the industry of its people and in the main tenance of its grandeur? It was the state of the bullion in the Bank. (Hear.) It was the alarming, the sudden, the rapid deflux of the precious metals which produced all these superficial symptoms, and which could not be neglected by an y one filling the high position of Chancellor of the Ex chequer, and acquainted with the real state of affairs as re- garded the amount of bullion in the Bank. lam speaking of this because it is a subject on which the Chancellor of the Exchequer challenged my statement that there were circumstances at the commencement of the year 18Z which should have male him pause in the course which he was taking of reducing the interest upon the unfunded debt. Here is a return by which it appears that on Decem ber the 3d, 1852, the bullion in the Bank amounted to 22,206,000/. Now, bear in mind those numbers while I ask you what it was on the 4th of February, a few days before the Minister of Finance made that startling adver tisement to the commercial and manufacturing world that he was going to reduce the interest upon the unfunded debt ? The bullion in the Bank in December, 1852, as I said before, was 22,206,0001., and on February the 4th, 1853, the bullion in the bank amounted to only 19,P00,0 00 /. (Hear, hear.) There had been in this short, but memorable period, a deflux of the precious metals to an amount ex ceeding 3,000,000/. (Hear.) Sir, should not that have made a Chancellor of the Exchequer hesitate before he introduced a series of alterations which, commencing with the reduction of the interest of the unfunded debt, was to terminate by the reduction of the interest of the whole funded debt of the country ? Having been taunted, and more than taunted - (hear, hear)—with the observation I ventured to make at the time—that I thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer should hesitate before he reduced the interest upon the unfunded debt, I ask the House of Commons, I ask hon. gentlemen sitting on both sides of the house whether, after the statement I have UQW wade) supported as . that statement is by authoritative documents, I was not Justified in the opinionl then expressed—whether, if they blame me at all, it is not rather for not having expressed myself in stronger language, and wliether they think a Minister of Finance ought to have chosen such a moment to tamper with the interest of the unfunded debt of this country? (Cheers from the Opposition benches.) A fall in the stocks of Li per cent. !—a diminution of the bullion in the Bank to the amount of more than 3,000,0001. !—a reduction in the premium of Exchequer-bills of 15s. ! and twice in the interval an increase to the amount of discount in the Bank parlour ! What rhetoric, what sophistry, can overcome facts like these? (Hear, hear.) Sir, having alluded to the policy or the impolicy of the course pursued by the right hon. gentleman in reducing the interest on the unfunded debt, I adverted to the loss which had been occasioned by this most imprudent and most injudicious enterprise. The right hon. gentleman last year made a great budget, and one of the items of that budget was the amount he had saved by his operations in the reduction of the interest upon the unfunded debt. He gave us an estimate of his savings. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEUQER, made an observation across the table which was inaudible. Mr. DISRAELI—I don't much care about being inter rupted.' One gains breath and sometimes collects one's thoughts. (Laughter.) The right hon. gentleman, though sometimes I think, he is an unfortunate financier, is a most accomplished orator, and, although I don't for a moment complain, I think he might, spars his observations for his reply. (Hear, hear.) Well, lam under the impression the right hon. gentleman told us he anticipated a saving by the reduction of interest on unfunded debt to the amount of 65,0001.—that is my memory of it. But, having a natural curiosity in the matter, and having the returns laid on the table which I had myself moved for, I said you will find the anticipated profit of 65.0001. will turn out an actual loss of 36,0001. making a difference of 101,0001. on the general financial statement of 1853. This led to immense contro versy. The right hon. gentleman said it was no such thing. and finally took up my own, returns, and, with an amenity of manner which I am sure the house must have noticed, laid them on the table, saying, " There are your own figures, which prove that you really know nothing about it." I naturally yielded to the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he said I did not know my own figures. (Laughter.) I am not going to weary the house with figures, as I dare say I shall be able to make myself understood without them, but if the house would be good enough to refer to one of those numerous returns which we were obliged to trouble the Government for—the return with reference to Exche quttabills—they will see what is the gain and what the loss by the operations regarding those bills. Of course the gain will go under the head of reduction, and the loss under that of increase ; there are only two items, making toge ther 82,0001. ; and on the side of reduction the numerous items giving a gain. I asked the right hou. gentleman to take his column of profits, and, looking at the date of the first item, which I believe was the most important item, more than 35,0001., it was found to be dated June 10, 1852, and was profit occasioned by the reduction iu the interest of Exchequer-bills, which I had the responsibility of making, and consequently I took credit for it, and, although the right hon. gentleman at first refused me the credit, he afterwards, in the course of the evening, said he had no objection to my doing so. There are six other items entered as profit, but which are really imaginary estimates of the saving effected by the paying off of Exche quer-bills which were at the time cancelled, and not re issued until some months afterwards, during which in terval of course no interest was paid. (Hear.) This saving of interest is taken credit for as profit ; but how were these Exchequer-bills paid off? (Hear, hear.) They were paid off out of the balances in the Exchequer, and the balances in the Exchequer were obliged to be repaid by deficiency bills, on which the right hou. gentleman paid interest. He cannot take credit, therefore, for the saving of interest on Exchequer-bills, unless he tells us what interest he has paid on deficiency bills, and as it certainly was not less than the interest on Exchequer-bills, I put one against the other. (Hear, hear.) Therefore, leaving out these items, and the item of 35,000 1 . to which I have already referred, instead of a gain of 65,000/. there is, in fact, a loss of 36,000/. (Sear.) Ido not mean to say that when we are doubling the income-tax, though only for six months, because at the end'of six months it will probably be something worse than that —(hear)—l don't mean to say that these are very considerable items. But the House of Commons is always of opinion that in matters of finance it is just as well to be exact. (Hear.) No doubt, if you have a minister of finance of very splendid ability, it may be a matter of no consequence whatever whether you have a balance in the Exchequer or not. (Hear, and a laugh.) With his exuberant resources, he will always be able to meet whatever emergency may arise—(laughter)---but if his genius can find out no other resource than to double a tax which is already felt to be most onerous, it is a gloomy and a grinding future for this country. (Hear.) But, sir, I have been contradicted on another point. The right hon. gentleman having contradicted upon the point, I am obliged to trouble the house with an appeal to a book to which I very seldom apply except in my own private library. lam unwilling to weary the house with quota tion; it is the right hon. gentleman, who, by that lively temperament of his, which leads him so hastily to contra dict his opponent, even on a subject of no importance, now forces me to refer to "Hansard." The right hon. gentleman says, that he made no estimate of gain upon Exchequer bills ; he says that I was unauthorised to make a state ment to that effect. Bat in the corrected report of the right hon. gentleman's speech, I find him saying thit there would be a saving in Exchequer-bills, owing to the dimi nution of interest, amounting to about 65,0001. (Hear.) Now, sir, I say this subject is not vast. It is not so im portant'as the first subject which I treated of—whether it was wise and prudent in the right honourable gentleman to commence a great experiment upon the credit of the country, under the circumstances in which he did so in the year 1853. But, sir, though it is not so important, the house will recollect that these are circumstances, that these are statements, the accuracy of which has been challenged. (Hear.) The house will recollect that the right hon. gen tleman has absolutely computed a saving, and intended to put it down to his own credit, and that because I re minded him that he was not entitled to it, he treated me with scarcely Parliamentary courtesy. When, on the Wednesday following, he came down, ho said that there had been some misapprehension, and with a courtesy which, as one does not always experience it, one therefore prizes the more, gave me.this return, and said that he was sorry to have been misunderstood. However, this statement made it perfectly clear. It is a very significant statement, the simplest in the world, the right hon. gentleman says. It completely explains what the mysterious papers on the table leave unintelligible. It settles the whole business. Well, sir, it does involve a most important matter. It is a return of the Exchequer-bills paid off in March rind Juno of the years 1853 and 1854. Now those of 1852 were paid off in 1853 ; those of 1853 in 1854. Here is the principal and interest of the Exchequer-bills of March and June, 1852, paid off in 1853, and for which lam responsible. It is 17,742,0001. The interest paid upon them was 367,0001. Then the bills for March and Juno, 1853, paid off in 1851. The interest on them was but 347,0001., and the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer says directly, there is your answer; there is a saving of 20,0001. (Hear.) He says, I don't go into returns moved for by a political opponent. I take a large and comprehensive view. (Laugh ter.) I will have the transactions of the whole year. The Exchequer-bills in your year must be compared with those of mine • the interest must be compared ; there is a saving of 20,0001., and that is your answer." (Laughter.) But now let us come to an analysis. There is not the slightest doubt that the interest of Exchequer-bills, in the one year, and in the other, was not the same. I call the attention of the honourable member for Lambeth to this subject. (Laughter.) I know that it is one that daily and nightly engages his attention, and that no one enjoys the details of an Exchequer-bill more than the honourable member. Sir, it is perfectly true that there exists a dif ference ; that there was 20,0001 more interest paid in the preceding year. Then, you will naturally say, what be comes of the fallacious estimate attributed to the Chancel lor of the Exchequer ?—what becomes of the loss said to be incurred? I will explain. Look at the amount of the Exchequer-bills .In 1852-53, Exchequer-bills, 17,700,0001.; in 1853-54, Exchequer-bills, 16,000,0001. (Hear.) It is very true that you paid 20,0001. more interest on the 17,700,0001. than on the 16,000,0001. ; but what interest were you pay ing all this time on the 1,700,0001. not accounted for in the second year? (Cheers.) How comes it that between the two years there is a difference of 1,700,0001. in the amount? (Hear.) I will tell you how it happens. Two-thirds of that 1,700,0001. were paid off by money out of the consoli dated fund, which money was paid again by deficiency bills. And then there was a payment by Exchequer bonds. Do you think Exchequer-bonds do not pay interest? There is a paper now on the table of the Lords, showing the interest paid on Exchequer-bonds to be bat ween 11,0001. and 12,0001. per annum. Deduct the interest on Exchequer bonds, take into the calculation these deficiency bills, and all together I should like to know whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not get off very well if the loss on his Exchequer-bills were as low as I have placed it, were 36,0001. (Cheers.) When I called the at tention of the house to the state of the balances in the Ex chequer) I adverted to the two causes which I believed had brought about a condition of affairs so dangerous to the country. One of those causes was the dealing with the interest of the unfunded debt by the Chancellor of the Ex chequer ; the other was his dealing with the interest of the funded debt. Now, I wish for a moment very briefly to touch on the second of these. I touch upon it because my statement with regard to it has been controverted as to fact, and utterly rejected as to opinion. (Hear.) We must recollect that there was a cause for all those menacing circumstances which ought to have induced the Chancellor of the Exchequer not to have reduced the interest ou the unfunded debt. There was a cause, and it is not a secret. At least it is not a secret now. It is avowed. A year or a year and a half ago a man might have been supposed to have been professing some heterodox and unpopular opinion if he had said that over-trading was this cause. But it is perfectly admitted now—(hear, hear) —by every person who has authority on such subjects. It has been admitted to night by a gentleman who was recently governor of the Ban k o f England, that there was extensive overtrfuliug, that that caused an influx of bullion, and that that mate rially affected the price of Consols and the premium on Exchequer-bills. The Chancellor of the Exchequer did not believe in that cause. (Hear.) Confident in the re sources of the country and in the success of the commer cial changes with which he is intimately connected, the right honourable gentleman defied, or disbelieved, in the overtrading which led to the disagreeable state of circumstances that commenced the year 1853. (Hear, hear.) Had anything happened besides the suspicion Chancellor of the Exchequer C or c ertainty of overtrading chem . , hear) to have made the r ight hon. gentleman the mor e prudent, when, at a later period, he commenced his greater speculation of dealing with the interest on the funded debt ? (Hear, hear.) Overtrading, the effects of over -speculation, of what may be called a surplus invest ment, had made themselves unmistakeably felt at the commencement of the year 1853. As the year advanced, there was another circumstance which made men grave. We heard early in the spring that there was the prospect of a bad harvest, (Hear, hear.) le there any gentleman who did not hear that ? The seed time had been most unpro pitious. The consequences were unusually fatal. In ad dition to the over speculation that had already appeared, we had a prospect of a bad harvest. Is that a circumstance that should make a man grave ? Is it a possibility which should make a minister of finance provident ? (Cheers) I grant much to a distinguished free trader. I have often heard the hon. member for Montrose express his anxiety to see the day when England would not grow a grain of wheat. (Cheers and laughter.) But I think the Chancel lor of the Exchequer would hardly go so far as that. If, therefore, he was told that there was a prospect of a bad harvest at that time I should have thought the probabi lity would have been that he would say, "As far as the Exchequer-bills are concerned, lam infer it ; but we know the worst ; we have got a large balance in the Exchequer, which is a great blessing ; and we have got more than that —we have the means of raising the interest on Exchequer bills." (Cheers.) But the right hon. gentleman, having before him over-speculation and possible famine in the vista, boldly goes to work ; and in the spring proposes a great measure. (Hear.) I have been long enough in this house to hear of " large and comprehensive measures" very often. (Laughter.) And I recollect the right hon. gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty once aayiugthet he suspected all large and comprehensive measures. I have lived to see him in a Cabinet distinguished for its large and comprehensive measures. (Laughter.) How ever, the Chancellor of the Exchequer's was to be a large measure, and was hailed with enthusiasm by the House of Commons, with acclamation by tho nation, as a measure absolutely to reduce the national debt. That was to be the ultimate consequence of the elaborate and ingenious but somewhat unintelligible project that was proposed to us on the 18th of April. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had that confidence in his resources that he determined— notwithstanding the efflux of bullion, notwithstanding the fall in the prices of public se curities, notwithstanding the more than menace of a bad harvest—to embark in this enormous, this portentous affair. Was there nothing else to warn and guide the Chancellor of the Exchequer besides the state of the exchanges—besides the countenances of the Bank directors—besides the visages of the farmers of England at that moment when he was going to embark in an undertaking of such immensity and of such possible danger. (Hear, hear.) Why, I can fancy that the Chan cellor of the xchequer being extremely engaged, being unrivalled for his devotion to affairs, being a public man who does more than his duty to his country, who devoted himself with an extreme ardour and unrivalled assiduity to the labours of his office—l can fancy that the Chancellor of the Exchequer at that time omitted to perform one of his duties, and he may be pardoned. As a Minister of the Crown, as a member of the Cabinet, it was his duty to become acquainted with every despatch on foreign affairs that arrives in this country. (Cheers.) Well, sir, 1 make every admission to the Chancellor of the Exchequer— I treat him with a fairness ' with which he has never treated me. (Hear.) I have myself rather a weakness for foreign politics, I like to read despatches, and when in (Ake I often read des patches which did not concern my own department. But I can quite exonerate the Chancellor of the Exchequer from the tedious and unprofitable task of pottering over those blue books —(loud cheers)—which were placed on our table at the commencement of the session by the gracious com mand of her Majesty, and which one of her Maiesty's . chief Ministers treated immediately with what I in my inexpe rience thought was unparliamentary derision, but which I now find was deserved mockery. (Prolonged cheers.) 1 can easily conceive that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with great ideas, in a great position, full of youth and genius, and energy, being determined to pay off the na tional debt —(a laugh)--was quite resolved not to waste his anxious hours in reading those two volumes which have recently been placed on our table in order to delude public opinion. (Cheers.) I therefore make that liberal allow ance to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I say that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was fully justified in not pots • tering over those blue-books, but were there no ether do cuments, the perusal of which would have been most main tary to the Chancellorof theExchequerwhich were received at that time ? (Hear.) I want to know from any gentle men here, who think they have a chance of being Chan cellor of the Exchequer—(a laugh)—what would have been their feelings, if they read a despatch from the ambassa dor of the Queen at St. Petersburg, marked " secret and confidential," soliciting a partition of the Turkish Empire. —(Hear, and cheers)—and telling us if, on reflection, we did not agree with it, the ingenious proposer was resolved to have his way, by one mode or another, and most cer tainly he would have recourse to force? I want to know whether the right hon. gentleman read those despatches ? (Hear.) Are we to believe that the right hon. gentleman did not read those despatches, and so believe that he is unworthy of the confidence of his Royal mistress ? Oh, no, not that. The right hon. gentleman must have read those despatches. The bullion in the Bank, even the state of the Exchequer-bills, could hardly have prevented his de voting some moments of his anxious day to the perusal of those startling missives. (Cheers.) To believe that the right hon. gentleman was ignorant of those State papers, is to believe that ho is utterly unworthy of his posi tion. But to believe that having read them, with the certainty that there had been an over-trading, with many menaces of a bad harvest, with crimson war in the - vista of uncounted years before him, he should come down with a proposal to deal with the funded and unfunded debt, is the most marvellous conception that ever entered into the head of man—(hear, hear, and loud cheers)—the most marvellous conception that ever yet occurred to the ad venturous spirit of a young Minister of Finance. (Re newed cheers.) What I say, sir, is, the right honourable gentleman owes a grievous responsibility to this house upon this subject. We must have explanations en this subject. It is not in the position it was last year. The right hon. gentleman cannot come forward now with the reasons, the excuses, of last year. He must come forward and tell us why he denied the over-speculation which the directors of the Bank had recognised. (Hear, hear) He must come forward and tell us why he neglected these menaces of a bad harvest. He may come forward and give his ver sion of these circumstances, but he cannot come forward and tell us that the possible or even the probable contin gency of war was not an element which occurred to him. (Cheers.) And I ask the House of Commons to decide upon the character which he arrogates to himself—which he will not allow me to make the subject of an idle com ment even in conversation and in committee. I will ask the house and the country whether a Minister of Finance, with such evidence of over-speculation iu the cottutry, as the circumstances of January, to which I have referred, prove with the evidence, as Minister of Finance, he ought to have possessed, as to the probable state of the harvest; and above all, in the possession of that dark secret, which is now clear, and manifest, and open to us all—(loud cheers)—l say, was he justified in the course which he took? Was he a prudent or provident man ? (Hear.) I want to know whether you think that a judicious, wise, and prudent course for the right hon. gentleman to take, with the knowledge which no one but himself and his colleagues could have possessed. which no critic in the House of Commons could even have suspected. (Cheers.) I want to know whether—in the possession of these facts—it is your opinion that the right hon. gentleman ought to have brought forward these vast schemes, which have involved in their partial and mitigated failure groat perplexity and embarrassment, but which, as Lord Monteagle truly ob served in another place, were happily not successful — (cheers),—schemes which, had they succeeded, might have placed this country in a position which the imagination of no man can picture, and might have involved responsibili ties and engagements which would have thrown us back 10 years at the least. (Hear, and cheers). That I say ie consideration—that is a state of affairs—which the house can now judge of with some advantage, (Hear.) Weil, sir, now, what was the scheme? I am not going to say a single word on the groat scheme of the right hon. gentleman. The great scheme of the right hon. gentle man has been touched on often, and I make only one re mark upon it, that I think if there had not been over speculation, if there had not been famine, if there had not been war, the larger scheme of conversion of the right hon. gentleman must have failed. (Hear, hear.) There was a radical defect in it which secured its failure, which my hon. friend the member for Suffolk has placed before the house on this night and on previous occasions, and which is not doubted by any person. (Hear, hoar.) It must have failed irrespective of all those circumstances which would have made any common financial scheme fail. If we had had influx of bullion—if we had had a most abun dant harvest—if we had had, instead of the war in which we are now engaged, that perpetual peace which the mem bers for the West Riding and for Manchester prophesied almost to the last, I say the great scheme of conversion must have failed, because it was founded on fallacious cal culations. But there was a portion of that scheme of a much snore rigid, absolute, and commonplace character, which did depend on circumstances which affect credit. It was an engagement to pay off , speaking generally, a portion of the public debt to the amount of ton millions. That was an ,undertaking which depended upon the weather, upon the harvest, upon the state of trade, upon the state of the bullion, upon the temper of Emperors and the resources of foreign nations. Now, sir, what was the engagement which the right hon. gentleman undertook under these circumstances ? The right hon. gentleman undertook, with perfect evidence before him that there •2 every cause in the distance which most disturbs 'the ney market—he undertook to pay off at a hundred, ten millions of the national debt, having no resources what ever for that purpose. (Hear.) Perhaps I should say in my view with no resources, because I think his attack on the balances was not a legitimate course. (Cheers.) I want to know how has that ended ? We have had an estimate to night of the loss. Tho hon. and learned member for Suffolk has told us the loss is 720,0001. It is, perhaps, impossible ac curately to tell what has been the loss on this forced at tempt to convert ten millions of South Sea Stock because the transaction is not yet finished. There is a cer tain degree of interest saved, of which the right hon. gen- ' tleman will no doubt inform us—there is the interest on Exchequer-bills, which you have instead of fixed balances. Put one against the other, and it is not at all impossible the loss at this moment is 7,0001. or 8,0001. Ido myself believe that it cannot be much less than that. But I will not dwell on the amount of loss. What I think is of great c onsequence, of vital consequence, of pressing importance, w hich cannot be too much urged on the attention of the house, because night after night it will recur, and, unless you meet it boldly, depend upon it you will be landed in financial disaster, is the consequence of thus tampering with the interest of the funded and unfunded debt in the state of your balances in the Exchequer. Now, sir, I havo ad verted to the state of the balances as far as they seem concerned, and. therefore I need not touch upon them. The right hon. gentleman delivered the other night some extraordinary opinions. I entirely differ from the right hon. gentleman. The member for Portsmouth has made a protest in favour of balances in the Exchequer to-night. We have heard the opinion of a gentleman who was Gover nor of the Bank ; and I must say, in passing, I was quite surprised that a gentleman like the member for Lambeth —(a laugh)—should get up in place, after the speech of the member for Peterborough, and say he takes a Bank view of the question. Theold-fashioned ideas of Bank views of ques tions was very well 20 years ago, before the present charter, and at that distant date when the member for Lambeth com menced his financial studies, and formed his financial mind —(a laugh) —but I can tell him this :—All that the directors of theißankof England want is, not to make a profit by a mi nistry, but to have a Minister who 'will leave them alone. That is all they require. Instead of taking a Bank view of questions, instead of viewing questions as to the interest of the Bank, since the last charter, all the directors wish is, that they should have a Minister who would leave them alone to carry on business according to those commercial principles which the late Sir Robert Peel says are the only principles which ought to subsist between the Go vernment and the Bank. (Cheers.) Well, I say, we have had protests by the hon. member for Portsmouth ; we have had indignant expressions of feeling from the member for Peterborough on the subject of balances in the public treasury ; but I cannot conceive that it is necessary to impress on any gentleman iu this house, unless he be a finance minister without balances—(a laugh)—then I know a man, as well as a fox, who has lost his tail has the pri vilege of the fable. (Loud laughter.) But I put it, the course of a nation should be the same as that of an indi vidual ; and I will ask any gentleman in this house, sup pose he was about to embark in an expensive law suit, ' would or would he not like to have a balance at his banker's ? We are going to embark in a very expensive struggle, and I want to know whether you think it for our advantage or not to have a balance at our banker's? Sir, we have heard a great deal in speeches of late about new, and philosophical, and enlightened principles of finance that, being engaged in war, we are to raise the whole of the supplies for the year in the year ; and, sir, that is a very fine sentiment, anti if war 'does not last snore than six months, I dare say we shall be able to maint ain its truth. But, sir, lam not so clear, when we come to prac tice, that we shall find it more than a sentiment. M eal . , hear.) lam rot, however, going to touch upon that ques tion. If the right honourable gentleman retains the con viction that with his own resources, and the resources of the country, such a result can be obtained, lot it be so. What I want to impress upon the house and upon the country is a much more serious affair. It may be a very just--certainly, it is a very just—it is possible it may be a practical thing, that you can raise in this country in the year the supplies that are necessary to carry on the war. Well, sir, it is a grand principle that this genera tion should bear the cost of its own achievements and not burden posterity. All that I can understand. But what ' is the state and the practice of our modern finances under the management of the right hon. gentleman ? The right hon, gentleman is not only goipg to carry on the war—it not only going to defray the expenses of the wet with the taxes of the year—he is not only going to guard posterity from the burden, but he is absolutely at the same time pur suing a system that is defraying the burden that was left to us by our predecessors. No cours e ca n be snore contrary to that which the right lion. gentleman says is hie srltord of finance—that which he lays down as a principle, that vas must not burden ourposterity—than hisschemo formaking sacrifices to defray the debts left by our predecessors. Sir, no country can stand it. No country can pay off the na tional debt—no country can attempt at the same time to reduce old encumbrances and to bear the cost of a war entirely from its own resources. (Hear, hear.) It is very doubtful, as I think twenty-four men out of every twenty-five in the house will admit, whetherin a continued struggle we can raise the supplies in one year that are necessary for the expenses of that year. That I say is very doubtful. - It is possible that from an excess of pa triotism, from an exorbitant amount of resources, you may do so. I, however, do not believe it. But it certainly is possible. No man, however, can maintain for a moment that you can carry on a war and raise supplies for ita oe. pense at the same time that you are paying off ten millions of debt. (Hear.) That is the position which the Chancel lor of the Excheceier has placed us in. The - right hon. gentleman is working two systems exactlysontastry to each other. He is coining forward animated by what- is a sound principle for this eonntry— that we sliord7l, if we embark in a war, not entail the cost of that %car upOn s posterity. But, while he is aski ng 116 to make these unheard-of sacri tices —while he is appealing to us to accomplish this unpre cedented act of patriotism, of virtue, of philanthropy— he is absolutely calling upon us to diminiell the debt which our pralecessurs left us. Turn it and twist it as you like, it is the most monstrous, the most impossible system of finance that ever was carried on. It has been an immense effort for Ministers to reduce the debt. Whenever there has been a surplus, you have had a. thousand applicants. It has been the popular opinion that you should diminish taxation and not the debt. Von have been obliged to pass special laws to insure the reduction of the debt. Yon ' have had special and stringent laws to effect that purpose. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer comes forward and says :—" Twill combine with my now system of finance the features of both systems. absolutely not burden pos• terity, and I'll defray the charges which our predecessors left us." Now, in what can this system end ? It will end in one of the largest loans that a minister of finance ever proposed in this house. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gen • tleman said the other day that I wanted him to propose a loan. (A cry of "Divide.") I have little more to say. You shall have to hear the Chancellor of the Eichequer in reply, and r dare say we shall hear him by and by. (Laugh ter.) We to an W y e are asked here to increase the taxation of the enormous extent from particular circum• stances, and the very form in which the question is brought before us must necessarily limit our consideration very much, and here is an hon. gentleman who cries " Divide. I do not think it necessary for us to divide just yet. (Laugh. ter.) My object was to call the attention of the house to the state of the balances, and I say the question of the balances must be met. It is in vain for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to say that I proposed that he should raise a loan. If the right bean. gentleman bad raised a loan in January, he could have raised it with greater advantage than he is able to raise ft now. If he attempts to raise it now, he will raise it at a greater advantage than he can expect to do in July. lire may put the question off for six months more, and he will' then raise it at a still greater ad vantage. It is evident that the right hon, gentleman lies been, in a time of peace R ed prosperity, or of fancied peace and prosperity, tampering with the resources of the coun try ; he Must incur the cost of his conduct, and he must put himself in a sound position. Von may rely upon it, that as certainly as I our now speaking here, he will be forced to raise a loan. There is no taxation—and he has tried it pretty strongly—that can extricate him from the position in which be has been placed. Well, it is a wise thing that a financier should so manage when you are left with a balance of 9,000,0001., that he should at a moment of exigency be forced to raise a loan ? I wish to impress upon the house the very great importance of this point. (Hear.) There is one point more, connected with the subject, upon which must teach. (Cries of adjourn.) If the house wishes to adjourn, lion. memb ers will be able to go to evening parties or to bed ; but I think they had much better remain here. (Laughter.) The right hon. gentleman said the other night that I held him responsible for raisin , - 6 the rate of interest which was occasioned by an acknowledged war and a bad harvest. That I deny. Ido not blame the right hon. gentleman for raising the rate of Exchequer bills. That was inevitable. But he ought to have foreseen the einem , stances which prevented him from lowering the rate. The right hon. gentleman urges one point which I feel to be a great fallacy. That fallacy may be found in the Book of Fallacies, by Bentham ; and as the members of the Govern ment are the disciples of Bentham and of Grote, they will be able to correct me if Imake a mistake. The right hon. gentleman says that it is very possible that ho has made a very great error, but that be is not to be blamed for it ; and he vindicated himself by accusing the person who charges him with the error with expressing au erroneous opinion. Bentham has noticed, in his Book of Fallacies, that you, when charged with misconduct, exonerate your selves by imputing an erroneous opinion to your adversary. The right houourable gentleman says, "It is all very well you charging me with making a mistake, but in December you yourself; occupying a responsible position, gave it as your opinion that the rate of interest which was then allowed, and which had not been raised at the Bank. would, on the whole ' be maintained." The right hon. gentleman thinks that is his vindication. Now, consi tiering that the right hon. gentleman is not a follower of mine, I cannot see how any opinion of mine can be a vin dication of his conduct. (Laughter.) But a greater fallacy than any fallacy mentioned by Bentham is the right lion. gentleman's mistaking the whole difference between .con duct and opinion. It is very true that in December I gave it as my opinion that there were causes which had occasioned, and which would, upon the whole, maintain a low late of interest. Speaking generally on such a subject, I cannot say that I ` see any great ground for changing my opinion. That opinion, although I am responsible for it in the house, and although I did not give it after long thought, was not merely my opinion, but the opinion of men who are second to none in the country for experience in monetary &Wain. But it was an opinion, like that opinion which has been referred to in the course of the debate, which was expressed by the right lion. gentleman in April last, to the clerk in Bir mingham, about low nrices. The right hon. gentleman then entertained the opinion that low prices had been created and would remain. I am snore charitable to the right hon. gentleman than he is to mue. I believe there is some ground for saying that, generally speaking, low prices • will be maintained. Cut whether the right hon. gentle man was right in his view as to low prices, or lin any view of a low rate of interest, these were two opinions .-- they were mere opinions, right or wrong—they were opinions, and a public moan who has to give an opiniou every night for six months will perhaps often 1):: in error. lint I do not charge the right lion, gentleman with having formed an erroneous opinion. What I say of the right hon. gentleman is this—that his conduct has been inju dicious—that, hiving the best information at his command —having before him all the circumstances which could have influenced the opinion of a prudent man, and so in fluenced his conduct—l care not what opinion he formed —he went and conducted himself improvidently, and in a manner detrimental to the public interests. (Hear, hear.) Ido not care for his opinion. I have no doubt that many of his opinions are worthy of attention, coming as they do from a man of his abilities ; but, after all, opinion is opinion, rand conduct is a' fact, and his conduct is what I blame, because it was conduct in defiance of experience, and conduct, therefore, which ought not to be approved of by the House of Commons. (Hear, hoar.) Sir, I have ventured to make these observations in vindication of the statement which I previously offered to the house, and which I challenge to be controverted. I know there is a retort to which I stn open. I have heard it already during the session, and for aught I know, the right honourable gentleman may jump up and ute it again. He may, per haps, get up and say, " Well, if that is your opinion, why do yon not come forward boldly and propose a vote of want of confidence in her Majesty's Ministers T' (Cries of " hear, hear.") "Hear ' hear," from . aen tl e men whose practice in cheering I Well uersbuid, remember that the noble lord opposite and others hare called attention to the retort that was made by the right hon. baronet the member for Morpeth (Sir G. Grey) in answer to the re marks of my right hon. friend near me, the member for Droitwich (Sir J. Pakington). I always listen to anything which falls from the right bon. member for Morpeth with attention, but I did not find that his retort contained that profundity of thought or felicity of expression which jus tified the solemn tones of the noble lord, because I believe the retort has already been made six times during the pre sent session, and probably not loss than six hundred times in this and other Parliaments. But, sir, there are good reasons why we should offer criticism on the conduct of tae Ministry, or a branch of the Ministry, without being answered as we were by the noble lord and the right hon. bayonet the Secretary for the Admiralty (Sir J. Graham), and why we do not come forward to propose a vote of no cenfidence. There is a good reason why we should not do this. There is no necessity for proposing . a vote of no eon? fidence in the present Administration. I think it is a use less ceremony. (Cheers and laughter.) It is quite unne cessary , in my mind, for me to waste the time of the house of Com mons—(hear, hear, and i ron ical cheers.) They cheer who do not think I am wasting your tune, and therefore I treat with all the courteous indifference Parliament will opposite te me, permit that derisive cheer. (Laughttr.) lam now an swering the words of groat men. Here it the leader of the house-- irs t present unattached, but who he t. L rei or i d s otfhetheexPeAdrinieinzellettly-311ineirteari.e these valuable and valiant allies who are a still have all the authority of ex-ministers, who have re peatedly„ frequently, and systematically, daring the pre . sent session, endeavoured to stop a l l debate and discussion g and cri - we call upon you to propose a vote of b u y ei sa se y 4 i 3 n u g r ,, co " n l d f uycetu, do not agree with our policy, no confidence in us. (li'ean) 1 say it is most preposterous, mostunconstitutional, and most inconsistent withthesimul• .esp be a t to foreign n a ti ons th a t at respect taiteons declaration of the same Ministers, th at it is of the the gre reaptestsett in i mpor tance e unan unity with i there should general expression of in Parliament. (Hear.) But Ido not put it on that pleat I s ay it is unnecessary for me to thin propose in Louse any vote of want of confidence in the present Go -vernment, for this simple reason —that it is apparent, no torious, and proved to all, that they have no confidence in each other. (Cheers and laughter.) Why, sir, let ns look f o r a momen t, and onl y for a moment, to those transactions wh i c h have led to this vote—this vote, that is to be passed ao idly that a few hours' discussion makes some hon. gen tionien call out " divid e " t as if the people of England wanted the income ta x to be converted ante 10,000,000/. ;sterling per annum without a word being said on the sub ject. Let us look a little at the conduct of our Ministers. I shall treat the subje c t, w h a t e ver answer I m a y receive, with fairness. I will not have recourse to any little test. I will try them by a great test. I will try them not by any of the petty points that are brought forward in party struggles--I will try them u pon subjects which interest men in the streets—upon subjects wh ich, as Dr. Johnson i said, any twelve men whom you could seize at Charing cross would take as tests. In deciding the question whe ther th e present Government have confidence in them selves, I will take the greatest subject which we have at the present moment —I will take the vast question of peace or war. What confideucc, what possible confidence. can this Cabinet, who have involved us in that ex .raordinarywe have in thecountrynow finds itself?: position in which . - ) Is there a luau among them who can tell us tHeir, hear. .., to war about? Is there e. man among , 'what we arc gem, • o can toll us what is the object at this moment of vI" 1 wh • •• I ••ll not uote a single pereoit exee4 t heir councils r AN i is Ives "Why sir, there Mill' here the no e or( wio is not, t house • . t who generally sits o pp osite to rue—a Secretary State tate 1 nit helia.s declared his opinion upon this great subject of fo • politics. He told us at the end of the last session of parliament, ill a reip I lmost the only speech of ability and. spirit which we have heard up on the subject, that we were going to war, and what we were going to war for. He said, "Wet are going to war because we believe the independence and integrity of Turkey are assailed, and hecamse we believe the interests of England to be involved in maintain big the independence and integrity of Turkey. ',We look upon the independence and integrity of Turkey," said the noble lord, " as facts, and our opinion is, that Otero is sa wiloll vitality anal life iu Turiity Ai in other coup trio, our August ; 1547. These clauses had been recognised by the highest lawyers of the day, and he trusted tile house would not refuse to grant an immediate inquiry into the subject. Mr, FITZROY said he bad requested the hon. mem ber to postpone his motion in consequence of the absence of his noble friend (Lord Palmerston) from indisposi tion. As the hon. member had not done so, he must ask the house to support him in moving for the adjourn ment of the debate. Mr. HUME said it was now nearly eighteen years ago since he first endeavoured to bring the sub ject before the house, and though he had been promised an inquiry by successive Governments none had ever taken place. He should, however, on the present occa sion advise his hon. friend to postpone his question at present. (Hear, hear.) After a few observations from Mr. Labouchere, Col. North, and Col. Dunne, Mr. GRENFELL said be would be most happy to accede to the adjournment, but he hoped that Govern ment would consent to its coming on on an early day. The debate was then adjourned to Friday next. CARLISLE CANONRIES. Mr. FERGUSON moved for leave to bring in a bill to appropriate the income of such one of the canonries of the Cathedral Church of Carlisle as shall next fall vacant, to the augmentation of certain ecclesiastical in cumbencies in that city. Mr. T. CHAMBERS seconded the motion. Mr. CARDWELL said it was not his intention to oppose the introduction of the bill. He had only to say, first, this was a local bill for putting Carlisle on a diffe rent footing from other cathedral cities, therefore if the house were to sanction this bill it would be putting Carlisle on a peculiar footing, and as the Capitular Commission were about to present their report to the house he hoped the house would at present suspend their judgment on the question for the present. Leave was then given to bring in the bill. BANKRUPTCY (IRELAND). Mr. CAIRNS moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend and consolidate the law of bankruptcy in Ireland. The motion having been seconded, The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for IRELAND said there could be no objection to the introduction of such a bill, and he should be most happy to give every facility in his power to it. Leave was then given to bring in the bill. AGREEMENT STAMPS. On the motion of Mr. JACKSON, a return was or dered of all the agreement stamps issued by the Stamp office in the years 1852 and 1853, distinguishing the 2s. 6d. stamps from the others, was ordered. WAYS AND MEANS. On bringing up the report on ways and means, Sir H. WILLOUGHBY rose to move au amendment, as he had considerable doubt whether any case had been made out for the imposition of an addition to the income tax. The amendment he now proposed to bring before the house was to move the omission in the reso►ution of the words, "and that the whole amount of the said additional duties shall be collected and paid with and over and above the first moiety of the duties assessed or charged by virtue of the said act, for the year aforesaid." He urged that there was no apparent reason for this addi tion to the income tax shown by the right hon. gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) when he made his financial statement to the house. It was quite clear this claim would not have been made on the income tax-payers if there had not been some extraordinary pres sure to reduce the balances in the Exchequer. It was im possible the house could agree to such an addition to the income tax without kno ►ving exactly what is the state of our financial resources. Last year the right hon. gentleman determined to deal with the 34 per Cents., and he believed the right hon. gentleman had to pay 4,500,000/, out of the balances to meet the deficiency caused by that measure. The object of the amendment which he (Sir H. Willoughby) proposed was, that the additional income tax should not be levied in the first half-year, but collected half-yearly with the old tax. He contended that no financial pressure could arise from spreading it over the whole year. Reverting to the additional tax, he insisted upon the injustice of levying it in one lump upon clerks, farmers, and persons receiving small incomes, and especially upon the long annuitants. The motion was seconded by Mr. FRENCH, who com plained of the harshness with which Ireland had been treated in reference to this tax. Mr. HANKEY reviewed the financial policy of the Chancellor of the Exchequer last year, and censured as injudicious and erroneous his operations upon both the funded and unfunded debt. The result of his conver sions, he contended, had been that, although he had paid off a considerable amount of the national debt, it had been done at a serious loss to the country, by means of balances in the Bank of England, which would have been otherwise applicable, without loss, to a reduction of the debt ; and he denied the expediency of his borow ing money of the Bank of England on deficiency bills. In conclusion, ho deprecated any tampering with the currency, by increasing the issue of paper, in contraven tion of the policy of the act of 1844. Mr W. WILLIAMS, in reply to Mr Hankey, justified the Chancellor of the Exchequer for preferring the inte rests of the public to those of the Bank of England, and considered that -his measures had been right, though unexpected events had deranged the money-market. Mr. SPOONER dissented entirely from Mr. Mulkey with respect to the issue of paper, insisting that it would be impossible to go on with the act of 1844 if the war continued, which would require the raising of large sums of money, while gold would be drained out of the country, crippling to that extent our circulation. With regard to the increased income tax, which he anticipated would not be limited to a half-year, he protested against the burdens of the war being thrown upon direct taxa tion. Mr. HUME vindicated the Chancellor of the Exche• quer from blame in his financial measures, which, through unforeseen political changes, had turned out unfortunate. He resisted the amendment, believing that the collection of the additional tax within the first half-year was not a matter of serious importance, and that, in the present emergency, the arrangement proposed was the best. Mr. WILKINSON, without reference to political derangement, questioned the policy of the conversion measure, which had cost the country 700,0001. or 800,0001. Mr. CAYLEY pointed out what be regarded as the probable mischievous effect of maintaining the restric tions of the act of 1844, upon our commercial transac tions, which must supply the fund out of which taxes were to be paid. He could not support the amendment. Mr. LA.ING hoped the Government would be very cautious in touching the principle of the law of 1844, which, in conjunction with the prudent action of the B ink of England, had, on the whole, been sanctioned by practical experience. The measure oilast session, though abortive, was, in his opinion, founded upon sound prin ciples, and he hoped to see it repeated under more fa vourable circumstances. He supported the original re solution. Mr. MALINS inveighed against the continuation and augmentation of a tax for the service of the war, which the Whig party had held up to the detestation of the country. The resources for the war could not be found in direct taxation ; and he agreed with Mr. Cay ley, that the mos. formidable enemy we should encounter would be the Bank Charter Act of 1844, the - paralysing effects of which he endeavoui ed to show were already commencing. He suggested as an indispensable provi sion against a future commercial crisis, that the restric tions of that act should be removed, and if a drain of gold beyond a certain amount take place, the Chancellor of the Excnequer, the First Lord of the Treasury, and the Bask of England should have a discretionary power of doing that by law which was done without law in 1847. Sir F. BARING, after observing that the subject of the B ink Act should be separately discussed, and that, with respect to the financial measures of the last session, the house had not yet heard the explanations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, avowed his opinion that, in adding to the income-tax, the Chancellor had made the best arrangement a Finance Minister could make under the circumstances. At the same time, he by no means meant that he should confine himself to one source of taxation hereafter. He opposed the amend ment. Sir F. KELLY described what he represented to he the deplorable condition of our finances, the balances in the Exchequer being, in January last, lower by 4,000,0001. than in the corresponding period of the last and preceding years ; and, in tracing the cause of this alarming deficiency, renewed his attack upon the com mutation scheme of the last session—inspired, he sup posed, by the demon of speculation—which had resulted in a dead loss of 720,0001., and the obligation of paying 8,000,0001. in money, the Government having had ample warning of the fatal course upon which they had embarked. From a series of elaborate calculations, he argued that the loss of the country might have reached the portentous amount of 10,000,0001. He then pro ceeded to show how the consequences of these transac tions affected our finances, by impoverishing the Exche quer and compelling a recourse to borrowing. Mr. GEACH defended the currency policy adopted in 1844, and supported the original resolution. Mr. DISRAELI—Sir, there are two questions put be. fore us to-night. One is the receipt of the important reso lution for the increase of the income tax ; the other is an amendment of my hon. friend the member for Evesham as to the operation and the mode of levying the amount that the house is asked to sanction by that resolution. With egard to the first motion—viz., whether we shall bring increased taxation on the country, and whether that taxa tion should be occasioned by an increase of the income tax, that appears to me to be a question which we cannot decide without entering into the policy which has occa sioned such a request on the part of her Majesty's Ministers (Hear.) But it appears to me, that on an occasion like the present—if Ido not mistake the forms of the house — we cannot very strictly, on the question started by my hon. friend, and within the limits of that question, enter upon that important subject. (Hear, hear.) And consi dering that, with the exception I believe of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and a solitary colleague, no member of the Government is present—(hear, hear)—l think the house will agree with me in thinking that this is not a convenient opportunity to enter into a discussion of those important events that must have occupied the attention of e very individual in this house, and which have led to the extraordinary demands that have been laid upon it by the Government. (Hear.) I must remind the house that when this project was laid before us we were informed by her Majesty's Government that we were virtually upon the eve of war, and that the causes of that contingency were to be explained by certain State papers which her Majesty had graciously placed upon the table. It was from the study of those documents that we were to feel convinced that her Majesty had been well advised to in. ent crease al liithug, theerarmamVu armaments; and, at voceand,poraexthpractsshed a d onourab e l t e er u m n i : a refo4ll4 I lino ford .. Ws, irts lion i,nU. igeg wiS uari ent ent Lite the .„,~; ~ tf,y4'