The Sun. — London, England, 1845-02-20 00:00:00

THE BUDGET. TIMES.—The Budget is now before the nation, and has already been subjected to an examination more deliberate than that which was necessarily blessed so largely by the grandeur of the financial changes proposed, and the wonderful command of facts, readiness, and perspicuity displayed by the propounder. Thus far there is something singular and ominous in the result of this examination. There are two things most undeniable in the Budget : first, that it is such an one as the nation would have expected from the Whigs, supposing that unfortunate party ever to have been in a condition to gi ve it ; secondl y , that it is decidedly popular in its tendency; for, except in the matter of the income-tax, it emancipates commerce at the expense of property, and ostentatiously favours the poor. AccorCingly, it was received by the Ministerial side in comparative silence, by the Opposition with hearty cheers, and by the people generally with satisfaction. The walls of the metropolis are placarded with Sir Robert's " Free Trade Budget." The economists are delighted. Yet, after all, that silence is worth more than those cheers and accla mations. The Whigs immediately set to work discover ing short-comings in the most liberal measure. In the multitude of grievances now to be redressed, they dis cover only that some have been omitted. If Sir Robert, instead of reducing taxes to the whole extent of the existing surplus, leaving the augmented estimates for the ensuing year to be provided for by the probable improvement of the revenue, and leaving the void of the income-tax to be filled tip from that source also, had quietly laid on three or four millions of new taxes, he could not have been met with more strenuous defiance. The metropolitan delegates and their Par liamentary allies set up their backs at th. Premier, measure their obstinacy with his, and accumulate on his devoted head the sins of all the tax-gatherers for the last thirty years, merely because, while he utterly sweeps away five important branches of re venue, and immensely reduces a sixth, a seventh also is not added to the list. After all, the flattery of foes is not worth the patience of a friend. We entirely agree with the gentlemen we have just referred to, and whose speeches we print in another column, that the window duties are most inconvenient, most unsalutary, most un equal, most unphilosophical. They spoil the inward com fort and outward appearance of our houses. Their exces sive and stupid rigour is a constant provocation to the man of taste and the thrifty householder. They mar the process of building as much as the duty on glass does, or rather did, the process of that manufacture. But, in our humble opinion, they who insist so valiantly on an immediate abolition of the duty, are bound to provide for the deficit in as distinct and categorical a form as the Premier has provided for his six reductions and six deficits. Let them bear in mind the various necessities of the case; that the only portions of our expenditure which are not absolutely and irreversibly fixed do not amount to 13,000,0001. ; that under existing circumstances, as Sir C. Napier himself will acknowledge, it is impossible ade quately to reduce those portions, or go on safely and re spectably, without seine increase ; that the window duties produce about 1,700,000 and they will see that something else is necessary than simply voting the tax a bore. At least, the elinister whose unfortunate responsibility it is to make, as well as to unmake, will proceed with a little more caution. The comparison of the window duties with the duty on glass is simple enough. Sir Robert enumerated four subjects of reduction, not as being all that there were, but as being particularly applicable at the present juncture, when there is an obvious necessity to choose such reductions ns shall themselves heal the wounds they make in the revenue. There were duties on articles of general consumption —on the raw materials of manufacture those which require expensive establishments, and those which restrict demand, and consequently trade. By these four tests at least the duty en glass has better claims than its competitor. It affects more than 3,.500,000 houses, instead of only about 450,000, besides that windows are only one branch of the glass manufac ture. Notwithstanding what was said on Saturday at the meeting referred to, the window duties are chiefly raised from the wealthier classes ; more than four-fifths of the whole being contribut• d by houses with more than 12 windows. They require no distinct establish ment for their (s)llecti,ii ; and, on the other hand, it is impossible to calculate the increase of demand which a remission of the du , y on glass must originate. The Premier mentioned watch-springs, pipes, tiles, and chimney ornaments ; he might have added conserva tories, now only within the reach of the wealthy. They talk even of glass bells for churches. There are of course important grounds of reduction besides the above four. But just now those four have the pre-eminence. Moreover the window duties are a mode, a very clumsy mode perhaps, of taxing houses. They are a property-tax. Evidently the day is approaching, as one of the speakers at the meet- ' ing we have referred to intimated, when the whole question of property will be reconsidered with a view to a fairer, less vexatious, and more permanent duty than what the nation now groans under. So, while there can be no po:.‘sible harm in demonstrating from facts the injurious character of the window duties, we must recommend patience for a 3-ear or two longer. But. having given this general approbation ef the Minister's prep-seri remission of taxation, and in truth of the Budget generally, we cannot let the tax upon property and ineomq pass without saying a few words upon our previous opposition to the tax affect. inn the latter ; for we still maintain that a tax upon income—that is, upon industry—to say nothing of its inquisitorial character, is unjust and inju riou'. First, with respect to the duration of this tax ; the profession that it is only to continue so many and so many years reminds us forcibly of the follow ing little anecdote :--A person who kept an asylum for the better class of Ltriuties had invited a friend or two to dine with him, some of his patients being adPnitted, sub row; to the same table. The host being called out on some occasion, one of the patients says to one of the guests, " What's the state of your milady, Sir ? How long have you been suffering ?” " Suff , ring ?" replied the guest, "I am not suffering at all. I was invited to dine with Mr. So-and-So (the hos!), and I am going home again this evening." .‘ Ali, Sir," said the patient, "so they told me, in order to get me here. I thought that I should go home again the same evening, but now I fancy I am in for life. . My only escape hence will be to the grave." And just so it will he with the income-tax. We were tempted into it at first for only three years ; now we are to have it for other three ; and when those are ended, and we are ex pecting a release, like the man in the madhouse, we shall find our burden commensurate with the lives of all of us. It will be a perpetual tax. If the people suffer it 1.. t them ; but let them not ho deceived ; let them, like, the patient in the asylum, enter in freely, and know that they are to be detained there for ever. The unfairness of the tax we hare argued and proved again and again till argument and proof are nee dl ess. On the present oc!:tasion Sir Robert Peel puts the question fairly and temperately in every other respect e xcept that if duration. lie says, in effect, will you have it, or have it tee? Between the produce of tit, property-tax, as Sep t•ed from income, and the casual fruits of industry, 0:1 the one hand, and the amount of taxes remitted, on the ether, there is very little differ ence; and wei firmly believe that the deficiency which would arise from th! abolition of the income part of this general tax might be easily supplied in another Ivey. GLOBE.—We are not amongst those who consider direct taxation of property,—or income so far as it can be considered es representing property—objectionable in principle. But we must have an ardent appetite in deed for direct taxation, if we could acquiesce in the unamended continuation of the income-tax as it stand,. If it is impossible to adjust the incidence of that impost, so as to rend,r it less unequal than it has been repeatedly shown it is at present, then nothing but a case of urgency could justify its original imposition, and nothing but a continuance of the same urgency can now justify its continuance. It stands on somewhat a similar footing to the system of impressment for manning the nary in war—supposing, fair the sake of the argu ment, impressment distinctly indispensable to that object It is admitted that impressment is a peculiar hardship on merchant seamen; and if that hardship were pro tracted (without the alleged necessity) in time of' peace the case would he somewhat analogous to that of an unequal income-tax protraeted to similar periods. If, therefore, it is impassible to impose any other in come-tax than the present, it is impossible to de fend its imposition ley any other plea than necessity. That plea abandoned, the ground is cut from under its continuation. It behoved Sir Robert Peel, who was pre-determin: d, it seems, to continue it, to have cverthrown this position, which not only strikes every reflecting mind, but which is irrefragably deduced from that which he him elf assumed in laying on this im post. It was on the plea of necessity that the objet Irons against it were met. It was on that plea—on the Case of urgency for supporting the public credit—for filling up ISe deficit which for one or two years had exist , d, after indirect, taxation was said to have reached its limits that this war tax—this income impress ment —was alone defend. ri. It cannot be defended so now, It must he fairly admitted that the public allowei the far ns silence gives consent. It was an • honourable feeling that prompted then] to take the word of the responsible :Meister both for the necessity he alleged, and for the concurrent duration of this forced requisition with that necessity. His " supplemental noses" should have sympathised (like Taliacotius's) with that which they first were cut from ; his grand excisio n was justified by necessity; and with that neces s.ty its produ c t was hound to drop. Even then, it is true, certain, wli'gs declared there was n necessity i n t i le matter. ' e They were not listened to : Esc are net sure that they s,ouill have been listened to on so vital a pol l , Robert Peal had, at The great advantage which Sir was, that their that tlin,s, over his opponents, discovered resources were hypo thetical, and suthlenly—his were direct. perhaps vulgar, but thereeVa_slnothing untried, nothing experimental about them. to propose a property •tax, alone 11 I the Whigs been in force w t it h h ci their other changes —as an interim measur e evv e i t i b „, would have prc•oecupied that strongr full effects—they ma ground which a it be so) who Minister holds in England (I.:n in g „r„.,,,y confronts boldly the - worst but how This ad vantage Sir Robert Peel took at eta l r e ti ". can he claim it now ? The strengthngof; then was the exceptional nature alike of thescrciasisse, and•ofbis provision for it. That the one would p as; away, L ;indthe other would vanish along with it—that tie eatAtordinary effort would cease with the extraordi nary occosiou--was the fur prospect held out. Well— the occasion has east ; and w'itit has become of the pros pe;oii<.4a of the oromise ? If the income-tax is :o be perma i nialit; e 4, , . be on grounds opposite to those of its — l/6 arguments on which the one was justi m "coldly furnish forth" the other— ' ifr • .:Te ac tualiy be reversed. We were then told Mi“ ifiXt *measure of last resort, to mot au exigency of instant Peril. Such measures in their own naturo must be bad. The more complete the Premier endea voured to make his demonstration of the urgency—the more evident is it that a measure of urgency belongs not to a season of no urgency. He has had time for setting his house in order. If this direct tax was to be perpetuated, he has had time for turning it into something else than a perpetuation of injustice. It is alleged that all taxation must press un equally. Yes—but taxes upon expenditure have this element of equality in them—that expenditure generally will be proportioned to means. In proportion as taxes strike objects of more luxurious expenditure, they be come fairer in their incidence ; though, unfortunately, a large taxation cannot be levied mainly on such objects. But, more or less, a man can limit his expenditure, in proportion as prudence demands, and deny himself such taxed enjoyments as would curtail due provision for the future. He is not left this refuge in the case of direct taxation on gross income ; and therefore it is the more imperative to graduate such taxation with some approach to equity. There is no such approach even pretended in the impost now sought to be prolonged. THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 20, 1845. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 19. The SrEeKsa took the Chair at the usual hour. RAILWAY BILLS. Mr. Mackenzie and other Hon. Members brought up re ports from the sub-Committees appointed to inquire whether the standing orders on certain private Bills had been complied with. The Committee reported in favour of the York and Scarborough Railway Line, the Leeds and Bradford, the Ashton and Stalybridge, the Manchester and Leeds ( Bur nley Branch), the Leeds and West Riding Junction, the Hull and Selby, the Kendal and Windermere, the Chester and Birkenhead, the Manchester and Carlisle, the Cockermouth and Workington, the Leeds and Dewsbury, the West York, and other lines. 'I he Guildford, Chichester, and Portnneuth, were reported not to have complied with the standing orders. I NCOM E-T AX. Sir J. MORDAUNT presented petitions from several places against the continuance of the income-tax. Colonel WOOD presented a petition from Worcester, pray ing that the owners of houses rented above 61. in that city should be rated to the poor-rates instead of the tenants, as at present. been received by the British aovernment until July, when they received a letter from Sir Robert Gordon, our Ambassador at Vienna, stating the facts of the case. The Aus trian Government strongly remonstrated with the British Go vernment for permitting the boat containing these 22 indivi 'foals to sail, which clearly showed that there had been no collu sion between the two Governments. These 22 individuals did land; the only account the British Government Lad received was conveyed to them in a letter from Mr. Temple, the British Minister at Naples. The British Government made no communication whatever to Mr. Temple, because his Noble Friend never suspected that 22 individuals, unarmed, and seemingly defenceless, would direct a project against the coast of Calabria. On the 26th of June Mr. Temple in formed the Government of what occurred on the landing of theft individuals. He said that a party landed, twenty-two in number, thus confirming the previous report; and, on the night of the 19th of June, they fell in with a small force, con • sisting of a few civic officers and three gens-d'armes. An engagement took place, in which one of the twenty-two was killed. St. Giovanni, the judge of the town, collected a num ber of the inhabitants, by which the project was entirely de feated, and the result proved highly satisfactory to the -Nea politan Government, inasmuch as the defeat of the party was owing to the courage and fidelity of the natives themselves. This answer to his Noble Friend was : that as they never suspected that 22 individuals, who had up to the present mo ment resided quietly in Corfu, would attempt to in vade the Italian shores from boats, they had never made any communication with them warning them from it ; at the same time they had never made any communication to the Austrian, Neapolitan, or the Roman Governments, and the reasons why they had not done so was, that they never suspected any such attempt was contemplated. He had now given the only answer he could give. Any im pression that the Government had allured these individuals to destruction was erroneous, and totally without foundation. THE IIIAUM OF MUSCAT. Mr. HUME wished to know whether there would be any objection to the production of the correspondence between the Imaum of Muscat and the present Government relative to the affairs of that country ?. Sir R. PEEL hoped the Hon. Gentleman would put the question to-morrow. WINDOW-TAX. Lord DUNCAN postponed his motion with respect to the window-tax, which stood for to-morrow, till Monday. He had stated his intention to do so in the early part of the even ing, and he now repeated it in the presence of the Right Hon. Baronet. Mr. ' , ERRAND wished to put a question to the Secretary of State for the Home Department. Three sessions ago, Mr. Moggeridge was appointed a Commis s i one r t o go into the inland counties, to Inquire into the distress existing there. He had made his report, but it had not been laid on the table of the House. He wished to know whether it was intended to lay it on the table of the House ? Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that the report had been made, but not printed, as far as it was it would be laid on the table of tho House. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that Members had been in formed that yesterday or to-day they were to be fur nished with the list at the articles on which the duty was to be taken off. Sir R. PEEL said that it had been found to be convenient to arrange the articles alphabetically, and as soon as that was dune the list would be laid on the table. SPERM OIL. Mr. GEORGE SMITH wished to ask a question of the First Lord of the Treasury, which was of importance to a large class of persons. It was, whether it was the intention of the Government only to reduce, or altogether to take off, the duty on sperm oil? . Sir R. PEEL stai I the duty on sperm oil was not to be given up at once, but the Government did intend to provide for ulti mately relinquishing that duty ; but they would postpone it, to such a period as not to interfere injuriously with existing inte rests. He might as well state new, that after the sth of Ja nuary, 1849—( Hear, hear, and laughter)—the duty on sperm oil should cease. SUGAR DUTIES. Lord JOHN RUSSELL asked when the exact resolutions proposed by the Government on the eugar duties would•be laid on the table ? Sir R. PEEL raid the House would be in possession of the resolutions to-morrow, and he was did hope that he should be able to furnish them this evening. In that case he hoped, in the discussion of the income-tax this evening, the sugar duties would not be debated, but would be left till those resolutions wer e seen. _ Lord J. RUSSELL thought it would be more reasonable for the Right Hon. Baronet to postpone the consideration of the sugar duties till Monday. Sir R. PEEL thought the Hon. Member for Ma nc h es t er had given a notice for equalising the duties on foreign and co lonial sugars on Friday next, and that there was no objection on the part of the Noble Lord to that discussion having prece dence of the Noble Lord's own resolution. Lor J. RUSSELL had no objection to that arrangement, supposing, after the Hight Hon. Gentleman's motion was dis posed of, no further proceedings should be taken till Monday. Sir ROBERT PEEL said, his only object in all thi s was to prevent confusion in the trade, to which it was of great im portance that the opinion of the House should be known. He should bate no objection to the discussion taking place on the motion of the Hon. Member for Manchester, on Friday next ; and on Monday they could take the discussion on the proposal of the Noble Lord. . _ _ Mr. GIBSON said it was, then, to be understood that the question of the equalization of duty on sugar would take place on Monday next, and for that purpose, he did not think it necessary to bo provided with the particular details of the Go vernment measure. Mr. ESCOTT wished to know from the Chancellor of:the Exchequer, whether any time would be allowed to those who had pail the duty to clear off their stocks ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that it was not the intention of the Government to allow any time. Mr. HUME wished to know whether, as the duty on sperm oil was to be taken off, the duty on common whale oil would also be taken off? Sir R. PEEL said it was the intention of the Government to take off the duty on whale oil, and at an earlier period than that at which it was to be taken off of sperm oil, because the same reasons did not exist in the case of whale oil for continuing the duty for so long a period. Mr. R. BLEWITT, before the Speaker left the chair, wished to ask the R ght Hon. the Chancellor of the Exche quer a qUestion respecting a paper that had been put into his hands that morning. He referred to the copy of the Naval Receipts and Expenditure for the year ending the 24th of March. 1844. It was a paper laid on the table et the House, in accordance with the provisions of an Act passed in the fourth year of the reign of William the Fourth, cap. 40, sec. 60. A certificate was attached to the paper in the following terms :—.“ We, the Commissioners for auditing the public accounts, hereby certify that this account has been audited by the officers under our employ, and we declare the statements made therein to be correct and ratisfacterv, subject to the notes and remarks by the Commissioners made thereon." This certificate was signed by three Commissioners, and he wished to call the attenti on o f t h e Right Honourable Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the terms, in which it was written. It was stated to be examined not by the Commissioners themselves, but by officers under their direction, and notwithstanding they had not done it themselves they certified that it was correct. This was the most extraordinary document that he had ever seen submitted to Parliament._( Great laughter.) If these gentlemen are to be paid for this work, and do not perform the duty themselves, he should consider it necessary for him to move that the ofiee be abolished altogether.— ( Hear, near.) N ow , what he wanted to a.k the Hon. Gentle man the Chancellor of the Exchequer was, what were the ,alaries paid to these three gentlemen ? He wished the Right Hon. Gentleman to explain to this House and the country what he a.,nsidered to be the value of their certificates. WAYS AND MEANS. Th e CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUE R sa id t h ose accounts were audited the same as any o th er pu bli c accounts . The l ion. were Gentlemen to must aet m hn be ou h a w t h a e re pu t h h li a c t se i r f v i t c h e e . to g Com missioners every account themselves it would be impossible The SeltALltft then left the ch a i r , an d t h e H ouse resolved I e xti itself into a Committe of Ways and Means. NCOME-TAX. would this evening move Non. Baronet' s r e so l u tion in Mr. ROEBUCK rose to propose h;amendment He said, the a itw addition a sundtoersttohoed, Rightthat H he reference to the income-tax, of which he had given notice, he would now at once proceed to do so. In the statement he was about to make, he would apply himself to the principles and to the declarations of the Right Hon. Baronet, and upon those he nould call upon him for his sup port. He would next address himself t o t h e ma j or i ty o f t h e Right Hon. Baronet, or, in the agricultural other w or d s , to aristocracy on the Oppo itibn benches; he would apply his arguments to their principles and declarations, and 11 ea upon them for their support.apply his would then arguments to the Irish Members in this House, except such of them as represented the landed interest of that country ; he would re mind them of their principles and declarations, and then call upon them for their votes — (Loud cries of " Hear, hear ") and therefore he would say that, whatever his explanations might be, he ought to have an ample majority on his motion. Now, in the first place, he would ask, what were the principles of the Right Hon. Baronet ? The Hon. I3aronet said that he had a diffiCwlty to encounter, and he proposed to remedy it by the continuation of the income-tax. But he went one step far ther, and said he would make such alterations in the tariff as would give an additional impulse to trade.—( Here the Hon. Member was rendered almost inaudible by the noise created by conversations going on in all parts of the House.) The Honourable Member was understood to say he would give a further impulse to trade by re moving certain taxes, and their vacancy he would fill up by continuing the income-tax upon England, Scotland, and %Vales, but made an exception in regard to Ireland. But if the tax was to be applied by a rule, he would ask, why make this exception ? He would show that it was not according to the rule of pro ceeding which the Right Honourable Baronet had :laid down for himself in respect to England and Scotland, to exempt Ireland. lie thought that when he should have shown that, he would have thrown the onus on the Right Hon. Bart., of prn 'ring his reasons for the exemption. The exigency was on the whole of the United Kingdom—it was common to Great Britain and Ireland, and their united wants should be met by their united means—which meant their united income and pro perty. On that principle the Right lion. Gentleman taxed the property of England and Scotland. Nosy he (Mr. Ft.) would ask him to go one step further, and to tax the realised capital of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) Ile did not ask him to tax professions, trade, and even office.—( Hear.) But he asked why should the realised property of Ireland be ex empted, when it did not differ•one iota from the other capital of this portion of the United Kingdom ?—(Hear,hear. ) H e would now approach ano th er part of the question ; and he would ask the agriculturists how it was that they supported the Right Ilon. Gentleman in this exemption ?"--( Hear.) They came in tones of mingled hope and despair to demand relief ; but the Right Hon. Baronet left them as they were ; and when he asked them why they complained of him, they answer like the puny child who has fallen over a stool, " because you did not kiss the place that was hurt."—(Laughter. ) He found means, however, to extricate himself from this exi gency which the Right Hon. Gentleman wont himself to create or promote. The Hon. Member for Somersetshire was complaining of distress. In the most touching strains ho spoke of the touching distress of the classes to which he was attached, and of the touching condect of the Minister by wham they had been thus so grievously touched. lie hoped that, on this occasion at least, he should have the vote of the Hon. Member for Somersetshire. What were his plans ? He could not tell; but in this measere he had some intimation of the protection of him whom he had created. Had they received any favour at his hands? Had their interests been in any way pro moted? .No. But of this they did not complain. They felt that they could get no relief from their burdens ; they felt that the exigencies of the State left them without relief, when relief was afforded to every other elasi. Vet of thi s !h ey s lid rio t complain. No ; but they did feel it a grievance that the Right Hon. Baronet had not expressed even sorrow for their griefs. They had created him—they had brought' him into existence —they had breathed into his nostrils the breath of life—and what was the return they met with? Why, the creature. who had life only by their means, turned round upon them, and was ready to strangle his creators. By this time they found that the Right Hon. Baronet had an opinion of his own, and those who had placed him in his present position found that that opinion did not tend to their advantage. He did then appeal to them, and on this occasion he did hope that they would no longer crawl on their bellies. They wanted a leader, they had found one, and they might find another if they would try. And what did the Irish Members expect ie this matter? How could they expect to be freed from this tax? He did, there fore, appeal to gentlemen opposite to extend this tax to Ireland. The agriculture of the country could i.ot be relieved but by extending the tax to the realised capital of Ireland. The land ' in Ireland was as fruitful and as valuable as any acres in the county of Somerset. What did the manufacturers say to this ? Why they were delighted with the scheme of tile Right Honourable Baronet. It was said he relieved the springs of industry—why, what was the fact? Manchester was bribed—Glasgow was bribed—and so were Newcastle and Sunderland. They said they could not compete with foreign countries unless their labourers worked certain hours. It manufacturers were honest in their measures to aid the labouring population, they would vote with him in endea vouring to put this tax upon the rich landlords of Ireland. They were beyond any appeal he could make ; if he were a money-lender he might be able to appeal to them, but not dealing in that commodity he could not reach their understandings. But he was about to appeal to those who professed to represent the Irish people. What, did not the Right Honourable Baronet say all his phrases were significant, and he watched him always, not to lind, like the Hon. Baronet, that he was a difficult bird on whose tail to put salt. —( ughter. ) The Right Hon. Baronet had put a stamp duty on Ireland, but he asked him to tax the land of Ireland. The Right Hon. Baronet taxed the capital enraged in the employment of labour in Ireland. The stamp duty was a tax on the transfer of all sorts of property, and was almost entirely paid by the middle class of that country, and a large portion of it tell on both the middling and labouring population. Now the. Hon. and Learned Member for Dungarvon had hinted to hint, the other evening, that he should take advantage of the aajotirnment of this debate to read Burke's speech on the con ciliation of America. Now, what was in the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's mind when he reminded him of America ? Why, revolution ! That the English Government might be fright ened into an unjust tax, because the people of Ireland were in such a turbulent state that they could not put a just tax open t hem. That was the intrepretatien of considering the speech of Mr. Burke, but he was sure the Right Hon. Gentleman could net have had this notion in his mind. The grand argument of that speech was, that America was not politically represented. Did the Right Hon. Gentleman mean to say that Ireland was not politically represented ? An HON. aleatax it—Not fully. Mr. ROEBUCK—Wait a minute! They had given Ire land some Members. Where were they now ?—(Cheers. ) What was the use of giving them any more if those they had already given them were of no use to them ? They ran from their posts—they deserted them like a sentinel placed in a dangerous situation, who could not keep his heart up to the difficulty of his position, threw down his musket. turned tail and ran away.—( Hear, hear.) They had deserted the ground on which the battle of the people of Ireland must be fought.—( Cheers.) He did not accuse the leading Irish Member upon that occasion—he did not mean him individually, but the whole of his followers, who, like him, had run away. They had done so because in that House they felt they were unable, from their own personal in significance, to gein• the attention of Honourable Ale,nhers. That he took to be the rationale of Conciliation-hall. He hoped the Hon. Member would abstain, after that night, from plead ing the unequal representation of Ireland es any justification for the existence of unequal taxation between the two coun tries. He would not impose any injustice upon any one. He would be the last person to sanction an act of injustice, but he wanted the Irish Members to show to him the injustice of his proposal.—( Hear, hear.) If they pointed to the stamp duty, he would say change it, because it was a tax which fell 'men the actual capital of the country. He said, then, charge it ley all means, and place it upon the landlords of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) Mark how they had been dealt with. The power of governing the country had been conceded to them. Within the last few years a large portion of the tithes of the country had been given to them, and every man who bought an estate now bought with it some of the tithes of the country. Why should they not be taxed, then, in the same way as the landlords and hard-working citizens of England?--(Hear.) The commercial interests in that House were asked to sanc tion this impost by the small " bribe" (he might as well call it, as it was, that word) offered them, while they were also called upon to bear with the extra tax upon income, in order to relieve the landlords of Ireland. Now, mark well, his point was not with any class in Ireland, but the untaxed landlords of that country. Mils landlord paid no assessed taxes ; he came now to this country—to this city, and brought his horses and carriages, and lived here in lodging' , and yet he was not call e d on to pay taxes for them ; while if r he (Mr. Roebuck) wished to ease his infirmities by keeping a horse he should pay taxes for it.—( Laughter.) The Right ' Hon. Gentleman near him (addressing Mr. Shell) might keep his three horses and a carriage here if he chose, and live in lodgings, and pay no taxes for them, while he (Mr. Roebuck), if he kept but one horse, down came th e tax-gatherer. (Loud laughter.) Those Irish , landlords, those lords of thousands, came to London, travelled to Paris —Brussels—the Nile, came back again, lived here, but—no taxes—( Laughter)—while if he (Jir. Roebuck) left his home and took a little recreation elsewhere, there was his house ready to be seized by the iron grasp of the never. failing tax-gatherer, whether he (Mr. Itobuck ) was there or not.—(Laughter.) Then let the House loiik at the la bours of the professional man of this conntry, who, though his earnings were the result of nights of hard toil, yet had to pay a tax upon income. —( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member i concluded by proposing his amendment, which was to the effect that tho property-tax be extended to Irelend. Mr. SHELL said he would commence by saying to the Hon. Member who had just sat down, that though he had done him the honour of paying him a compliment in the allusion he had made, he regretted he could not reciprocate the compliment.—(Cries of "Hear, hear.") His Hon. Friend had adverted to the absence of many Irish re presentatives from the United Parliament. Now, he (Mr. Sheil) felt great sympathy with his absent friends, although he had not thought it judicious or consistent with his duty to his own constituents to follow their example.—( Loud cheers. ) At the same time he should be very sorry to impugn their mo tives, for their case was this, that Ireland was not adequately represented. The case they made was, that the county of Cork returned only five Members, whereas the principalities of Wales, with a smaller population, returned thirty-three Members. Many large towns had no representatives at all, whereas every insignificant town in England, with 2,000 inha bitants, returned two Members. They said that they had not the benefit of English institutions. But his Hon. Friend (Mr. Roebuck) was willing to give them the benefit of such English institutions as the same Church, the same income tax, but not the same registration or representation. They said that they had tried for fourteen years since the Reform II 11, to obtain juaice.—( Hear, hear.) They despaired of success. They were overwhelmed by the majority of English and Scotch Members, and they thought it better to try the pressure out of doors.—(Cheers.) Net by force, but by a gentle kind of violence.—( Cheers and laughter.) They thought that by these means, more effectually than by their presence in Parliament, they might induce that power and the Government] to give them the benefit of English institutions. —( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Kendal wished the income-tax to be perpetuated, and the Hon. Member for Bath wished it to be infinite--( Hear, hear, and laughter)—so that between them they would have it a divine tax.—(Laughter. ) He ( Mr. Sheil) did venture, between Tuesday morning and Wednesday evening, to refer to the speech of the Hon. Member fur Bath, and he did think that that speech contained some ' most admirable admonitions. That speech was said to be imbued with some of the spirit of a distinguished individual formerly a Member of that House, and he did believe that, on a review of the efforts of that great man, that this to which his ob servation had been directed was the most important, if not the very best. It exhibited that great man in all the fulieeis ot his power, as comprehensive and sound in judgment as he was bright in imagination and brilliant in idea. If the lion. Mem ber had drawn from such a source, he had drawn with advan tage ; and he did suspect that he observed something of the spirit of his original in those forcible addresses which he had heard in that House when the Hon. Member was warning the Government of the day not to interefere with the rights of the colonies, and when in estimating their supplies he emphatically coejured them not for a moment to attempt to lay hands on the revenues of Canada. Now, what was the course the lion. Member was now pursuing? He was attempting to induce the Government to violate the very principle of which he him self had, bat a few years ago, been such an able advocate. No such plan as the lion. Member for Bath had recommended had ever been adopted. For when the income-tax had first been laid on by Mr. Pitt, in 1793, which was before the union, E 0 attempt had been made to extend the impost to Ireland. The income-tax was re pealed in 1803, at the end of the war. The emergency which occasioned it had passed away. It was always considered a war tax—a tax to be imposed on the arising of extraordinary necessity, and seasons of emergency alone could justify it. On the renewal of the war in 1804 it was again imposed, bat even then, notwithstanding all the outlay of this country, it was not extended to Ireland. Neither Lord Sidmouth, nor Mr. Pitt, nor Mr. Percival, nor Lord Liverpool, had ever thought of extending the income-tax to Ireland, and he (Mr. Sheil) did doubt whether after these experiments and occasions— extreme occasions—any attempt to extend such a measure to Ireland could be made of any profitable avail, and he did think that it would be a little, as well as an unwise at tempt, to draw on the confined resources of Ireland to swell the golden Pactolus of British opulence.—( Hear, hear. ) It was true that the revenues of Ireland exceeded the legitimate expenses of that country ; it, did not exceed the debt of Ire land, but that debt was created by its connexion with this country. It was hard, after suffering all that had been cast upon them by this country, they should put upon then, the in come-tax. The ground and quit rents of Ireland had been spent upon Windsor Castle and on the improvement of Lon don. —( Hear.) More than a million had been expended of those rents in that way. The Right Hon. Baronet, as he un derstood, intended to extend the means of Catholic education in Ireland ; could not, he would ask them, the ground and quit rents of Ireland be applied to that purpose? lie thought to place an income-tax on the people of Ireland would be unjust and impolitic. If they were to extend the income tax to Ireland the lion. Member for Donegal would at once join the repealers.—( Laughter.) He would at once take the Grey Porter view of it, and he would become a sympathiser with the Concilliation-hall. In 1782 the Irish extorted the independence of their Parliament from this country, and there were men who thought before they died to see that inde pendence restored again.—(Cries of " Hear," and cheers. ) Before he sat down—which he should very soon do—he should be able to show that, without imposing the income-tax on Ire land, they might raise a large amount of revenue. Saving was equivalent to gain.—( Hear, hear.) He was surprised his lion. Friend, the Member fur Montrose, the other night, should have forgotten his usual topics ; under the influence of the eloquence of the Right Hon. Baronet, he seemed even to forget himself. He did not say a word about saving the revenue, or economy, or the reductions that might be made in the army in Ireland under a better system of government. His Hon. Friend had often pointed out how two thousand men were enough for Scotland, and the evil of keeping up so large a force in Ire land. But on that occasion his Hon. Friend, who was gene rally as watchful as the dragon that kept guard over the Golden Fleece, was lulled to sleep by the persuasive eloquence of the Right Hon. Baronet, and yielded to the enchantments of that fascinating financier 1—( Great laughter.) But his Hon. Friend was gate right in the positions he had so often laid down. They could, by conferring good government on Ire land, effect an essential saving. if they would adapt their in stitutions to Ireland, instead of adapting Ireland to their insti tutions—(Hear, hear)—the phrase was en antithesis, but it was full of truth—if they would adapt their institutions to Ire land, instead of adapting Ireland to their institutions—they would make money of them. Peace was a great happiness ; let them not inflict merely a temporary tranquillity on that coun try ; let them make it a perpetual peace.—(Cheers.) Peace would make it a larger contributor to their revenue. Pease would increase its import duties—peace would make it consume more sugar and coffee —peace would enable it to take more British manufactures —peace would throw open a vast field of enterprise—and in the prosperity of Ireland. they would for all their munificence he usuriously repaid.—( Loud cheering. ) Sir J. l' II RE LL, after wingra.tulatieg the House on the display of eloquence they had heard that evening, said, if he did not in his own person exhibit an example of agri cultural distress—(lmmense laughter)—yet he hoped it would be conceded to him that distress was in the habit of meeting with " strange bedfellows."—( Renewed laughter. ) He was aware that many Gentlemen in that House were not inclined to support any proposition coming from the Hon. Mem ber opposite, b 1 reason of his entertaining extreme opinions on certain politteal subjects; but he (Sir J. Tyrrell) now trusted to the courage of his'agricultural friends around him—( A laugh) —that they would pluck up their courage—(Laughter)—and that be would see by the announcement in to-morrow's papers, by the report on the division, that they had not, to use a nau tical term, gone "bout ship" but had recorded their votes in favour of this motion.— ( Laughter. ) He would say it was ! on grounds et common justice that this motion . had been in troduced to this House. 'llle Hon. Member for Dungarvon had appealed to the consideration of the House, and asked the House to deal with the proposition in accordance with the spirit of the Act of Union, by which it would 'appear that the Honourable Member contended that if this tax were imposed, there would be a breach of faith and good understanding; but he (Sir J. Tyrrell) would con tend for it that there were very few Members of the Hou e who would take that view of this proposition. I'pon a former occasion, when Mr. Bankes made a similar proposition to that House, he called upon the clerk at the table to read the seventh clause of the Act of Union, and the argument then used by that geutleman would have completely upset the arguments of the lion. Member for Dungarvon, and would not have left him a leg to stand on.—( A laugh.) But the Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government had said t: at it would be unjust to impose the income-tax upon Ireland. Now, he (Sir John Tyrrell) held in his hand a report of the sentiments of the Hon. Baronet, uttered upon this subject in 1833, when he said that Ireland should not Le exempt from any such im post, as such a measure would be extren.ely unjust.—(Hear, hear.) He (Sir J. Tyrrell) was as much averse as any one to any unjust taxation of Ireland ; but in the present pro position it was intended to deal only with the rich people of that cauntry.—( Hear. hear.) From the feeling that ap peared to exist in the House upon this subject, he had no hesitation in saying that those who now occupied seats on the Treasury benches, as well as those on the other side, who held commissions in the army, were too much in the habit •f regarding their places as family-seats, and all were too often found on the same side of the House. Yes, he would say again, that Hun. Members on the Ministerial aide were too often to he found joining Hon. Members on the Opposition side on the voluntary principle_( Laughter)—while those on the Opposition side were to be equally often found supporting the Right Hon. Baronet on the compulsory principle.—( Great laughter.) He had been lest to understand that even now there was a negotiation going on fur a conciliation measure with Ireland, between the Noble Lerd the Member for London and some of the Opposition Members.—( Laughter.) Now, if the papers were in a sufficiently forward state, he would move that they be laid upon the table of the House.—(Laughter. ) Ile had heard much of justice to Ireland ; but he would say that, if this proposition was not carried, there would not be justice done to that country in pecuniary matters.—( Laughter. ) If this were not carried, what was meant by the often-repeated phrase of " Hereditary bondsmen don't know."—(Shouts of laughter.) Ile was not for taxing the lower orders of the Irish people ; but if the income-tax were imposed upon the landlords of that country, he could not agree that the result would not be an outbreak in that country, because those who had to pay it were bound to keep the peace by the best passible security—namely, the preservation of their own interests.— ( Hear, hear.) He had now nearly concluded ; but be fore he aid so he hoped, before the close of this de bate, to hear some Honourable Member reply to the unanswerable speech of the Hon. Member for Dungarvon. —(Loud laughter. ) There was to be a remission of taxes to a large amount, in Ireland, on sugar and on glass ; and, there fore, if there were not an equivalent imposed, he could tell the House that great discontent would be created, for the commer cial interests of this country were crawlingly alive to such con duct.—( Lord laughter. ) Mr. WILLIAMS had listened with attention to the speech of the Hon Member for Dungarvon, but he regretted to say he had heard no argumenta adduced in it which convinced him that this tax should not be imposed on the landlords of Ireland. He (Mr. 'Williams) (lid think that any landlord in Ireland, whether he had 1,00 0 1., or 10.000/, or 20,000/. a-year, should pay this tax as well as the tradesmen in England. who had roily 1501. a-yaar profi by their ti ads. Now the proposition he ( air. Williams) would make was, that those persons in Ireland who received their incomes out of the puiblic money, should pay this tax, as well as they did in England. He should like to know why the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, who received about 20,000/. a-year of the public money, should not pay this tax. He would likewise wish to know why the Chief Secretary of Ireland (lid not pay this tax? That officer had 500/. a-year more than the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and not half so much to do, and yet he had not this tax to pay. Neither was it paid by the judges of Ireland, who received an aggregate sum of 150,000/. a-)ear of the public money. He had before him documents by which to prove that in fifteen years, between 1821 and 1841, Ireland paid only one-twelfth of the taxes ; in fifteen years, only one-thirteenth ; and in five y'ea's, only one-six teenth ; while in the year 1844, the amount of taxes paid by Ireland did not exceed 4,097,000/., and England paid, in the same year, 51,000,0001. He thought that great injustice had been done to Ireland ; but he would contend for it that in the item of taxes that country had been most remarkably pro tected. It was well known that one-third of the Crown patronage in this country had been bestowed on Ireland— ( Cries of " No, no") —and therefore, if the Right Hon. Baronet did not give good reasons for not extending this tax to Ireland, he (Ur. Williams) would persevere in hit motion There were many articles of import on which small duties were levied, which cost so much in the collection that it was not worth while to retain them, at the same time that the best of time and the vexation which the collection occrsioned could only be known to the importers.—( Hear, hear.) If the Customs' duties on fifty articles were repealed, the sacrifice of revenue would nut be more than half a million.— ( Hear. hear. ) Taking the cost of coil, ction of the stamp duties, the income tax, the assessed taxes, and the window-tax. it amounted only to 431/,000/., and that was for the collection of 16,850,000/., or about one-fourth of the whole revenue. If all the taxes were collected at the same rate, the cost would collection o f 59,000,000/., si th a t be only 1,600,000/. for the a vast amount could be saved by raising the revenue from other sources than the vexatious taxes that came under the head of Customs and Excise. At the same time, he admitted that no one could find fault with the reductions which the Right Hon. Baronet had made, although it was to be wished that he had made more, and chosen other articles. Now, he must say that there was not in the who'e history of taxation an instance of a burden so hea v y i mpose d upon the same amount of population as now pressed upon the people of Great Bri tain.—(llear, hear.) We were now in the thirtieth year of peace, and the taxation was as heavy as at the height of the war, The Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir J. Graham) had written a book—( A laugh)—in which he proved, that, taking into account the state of the currency, although the nominal amount of the taxation in the year 1813 (the most expensive of the war). was 81,000,000/., it was re .11y equal only to 52,000,000/. He could see no reason for the increase of the naval expenditure, which was to be greater in this year of profound peace than it was in 1841, when we had '26 ships o f th e li ne a t sea.—( Hear) He did not, however, object to keeping the navy which was the best defence of the country, hut he objected altogether to the proposed increase of the army.' The average amount of the army in 10 years, when the Whigs were in office (arid they had enough to do with war in China and other places on their hands), was 105,059, but now in profound peace it was to be 129,000 men, with an increase besides of 2,500 marines, and 10,000 armed pensioners.— ( Hear, hear.) He trusted that when the Right Hon. Baronet (ime to the estimates he would be prepared either te satisfy the House of a necessity for the increase, or to make a consider able reduction.—( Hear.) When the present amendment was disposed of, he should move that the tax upon income he ex tended to salaries in Ireland. • Mr. ROSS would not at present go into a discussion of all ' the questions which the Hon. Gentleman had introduced. But he would say that his proposition for extending the income ' tax to Ireland had so much the appearance of justice that he (Mr. Ross) might probably feel it his duty to vote with the Honourable Gentleman if it came to a di vision.--( Hear.) As to the Hon. Member for Bath he would only sly that, if the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen were placed in the dtuation of the Right Hon. Barone., would not have ventured to bring forward his present proposi tion.—(" Hear, hear," from Sir R. Peel.) There were con siderations of policy which, in some cases, must weigh against a proposition which had abstract justice in its favour.—( Hear.) The present position of Ireland was so very peculiar, that the income-tax could not be applied to that country, and he re gretted exceedingly the sentiments ad tressed by the Hon. Member for Bath to the landlords of the sister kingdom. They were at all times ready to subscribe to agricultural and medical institutions for the relief of the deserving poor. He thought then it would be injurious at this period to extend the income tax to Ireland, and he trusted that, hereafter, this debate might lead Hon. Gentlemen to entertain stmpathetic views ' towards Ireland. He entreated them not to turn their hearts against its misfortunes, but he felt assured that the debate would not be closed without a better feeling being produced towards that unhappy country. Every one knew the suffer ings it had lately undergone. It had been disturbed by poli tical commotions, and was it right, no-.s that the public mind was becoming soothed, to pass an Act which would disturb the better feeling which was beginning to be engendered on the other side of the channel towards this country.—( Cheers. ) Lord BERNARD said, connected as he was with Ireland by birth and other ties, he could not quietly listen to the sen timents which had been expressed with reqrd to the landlords of that country. Before, however, he proceeded to discuss that question, he would take leave to ref , r to the opening part of the speech of the Hon. Member for Dungarvon. The Hon. Gentleman had complained that Ireland was not fairly repre sented in the Legislature of the United Kingdom ; but he could distinctly state that this was not the fact. The Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had charged the landlords of Ire land with desiring to shrink from sustaining their share of the burdens which the exigencies of the times required to be im posed on the country. If there was a great financial scheme to be carried —if measures were to be proposed from which it was reasonable to anticipate most important benefits would result, he was sure that the landlords of Ireland would not be found shrinking from bearing their part of the national burden. But the Right Hon. Baronet,when he brought forward the income tax, thought it was expedient that it should not be extended to Ireland. What did the Hon. Member for B,th propose? He proposed to do one of two things—he either proposed to tax the real property of Ireland, or else he proposed to tax the whole of thecountry. Now if it were merely the landed property in Ireland which lie proposed to tax, he would tell him that the national exchequer derived an equivalent for the income-tax in the stamp duty. But there was another ground on which it was decided not to extend the income-tax to Ireland three years ago. There was no machinery in Ireland by which the tax could be collected. The expense of its collection would swallow up the larger part of the sum to be collected ; and he agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet that the substitution of an equivalent was more ad vantageous to the interests of the nation. In the reigns of Richard 111. and Henry VIIi. a tax of four shillings in the pound was imposed on the landed proprietors to prevent absen teeism. In 1775 the tax was reduced to two shillings in the pound. But this all equally failed to bring back the landed proprietors to the country. But the Right Hon. Baronet, in not extending the income-tax to Ireland, held out an induce ment to those whose duty and inclination it ought to be to reside upon the property, and to minister to the wants of those whom Providence had committed to their care. If the Hon. and Learned Member intended to restrict the tax to the landlords of Ireland, how little would it produce to the revenue! For was it riot notorious that a great proportion of the rental of Ireland was paid away in mortgages, and in re ducing incumbrances imposed upon the estate• by their ances tors? Was it not equally true that these mortgages and in- cumbrances were paid to persons residing in England, who paid the income-tax out of them in this country ? He did be lieve, then, if they were to extend the income-tax to Ireland, the returns would not exceed the present proceeds of the stamp duty. But if the Hon. and Learned Gentleman meant to any that the tax was to be extended tt , roughout Ireland gene rally, he would urge upon him to consider what had been the peculiar position of that country up to the present time. What was the state of that country twelve months ago? He spoke from personal experience when he stated that large masses were in the habit of being collected—( Hear, hear, from Sir It. Peep—for the purpose of intimidating the Govern ment. It must be remembered, also, that at this time dread ful and simultaneous fires occurred, which were accompanied by the most ominous silence amongst all parties, so as to leave no doubt who were the originators of them. When be looked at these cireurestances, and remembered that the judivous esiurse and the firmness evinces! by her Majesty's government in that country had restored peace, tranquillity, and happiness, he thought it unwise to extend a burden to Ireland which would be productive of no practical good. He spoke from personal exlierience, and he could assure the House that it would be an unwise step to adopt the amendment of the Hon. and Learned Member. Men who a short time ago were engaged in organising large bodies of men, for the purpose of con spiracy, were now laying out their money in improving their farms, and devoting themselves with no second object to the im proving the conditien of the country. When that was the : case, was it wi-hin the pale of political wisdom to come forward ' and create another source of discord in the country ? As an Irish Member he most cordially approved of the financial tne;s: sures proposed by the Government. He believed the propn.7 reductions would improve the manufacturing interests of coontry, and enlarge th , market 61 the Irish agri rulturi who were in a great measure deproqlent on the Erglish n nufacturers.—( Hear, hear, from Sir Robert reel.) he looked forward to the many gratifying result s whichiuc e. thought the reduction in the duty of cotton would prcanbe t: . So far as Ir e land was c o ncerned, a gre at e r boon could n given, for it would encourage their manufactures ; and when they considered the water power, and the magnificent rivecrosino, Ireland, might they not hope, at some future time, th e r t merce of .he country would be increased. Th e western pa of Ireland was peculiarly adapted for manufacturing purposes,: but now they were compelled to go to Liverpool fortheir cottot. He h ?pert, however, to see the time when ships di , e , t tromn the States of America would he found landing their c argers °, ri d coast of Ireland. Let the House remember the agrieui tn i advantages of Ireland. lie could assure those Hon. Gent le men men who talked so much of the absti act that Ireland would tosses the means of affording this cot t f t e t , , Y ample and sufficient food, it' they ould only assist, her i voloping the resources of the country y w ould only 11; te prove her situation. he was sore that, at no disteit dAy, would be able to minister to the wants of the inereasing lotion of England. It was his firm conviction that she w", in principles of free tra de, that yet be the means of saving this country from being hunthlo the dust to ask for food from a foreign nation.—( Cheers. )„" Mr. BELLEW concurred in the latter sentim ents of 'e, Noble Lord, for he believed the resources of Irelan d had Pei been sufficiently developed. lie thought it was in the P ere ,' of her Majesty's Government to make her a flourishing .s.nz prosperous country.—( Hear, hear.) Becore the income e; could be extended to Ireland there were two things t° be it; sidered—first, that there was an easy mode of colleetiq,oo, and secondly, that the country was In a prosperous conidettilind both as regarded agriculture anti manufactures. Be r A nd was more of an agricultural than a manufacturing country, a io they must recollect that only one million of the tax collecteho England was curoributed by the landed interest. Ne l l , to on strgly did this show the inexpediency of extending this f Ireland, where two-th rds of she population were engagedingt culture. Before the union the taxation of Ireland ha d been three millions. But what was the fact between that time-"lbeia lfsol—anti 1807, the taxation of Ireland had been inerl h ae i e st mare than 500,0001. a year. and this he thought a SU t o Of answer to those Hon. Gentlemen who thought that A . g to this nature should he imposed on that country. In l' etl „ n d foe them this statement, he felt that it was a sufficien t g on d,e s his opposition to the tax. While such claims were T e d ifl property, and while Ireland became in this way in" ; :frring the debts of Great Britain in an unequal degree, eOnbould her previous position, was it fair that. a property -t ",'„,sei now be imposed on the country ? He (Mr. Bellew/co os English gentlemen whether it was right to impose t2Cfrors Ireland ,-,hen so little c imparativelv had b ee n taken aolJ ena[; the taxes imposed upon her ? Much had been said ref?' the lighter burdens imposed upon Ireland, soiree of encouragement for absentees.—( Hear, h e t .''' ) t he se he felt assured that all those who were intimate wit h ~ e h tual position of that country, would be aware that A° 5 ,.." t the ference could fairly be drawn, and he did not think ojl B Hon. anti Learned Member for Bath had exercised 1 0 0 discretion in now pressing this tax on the country, ° TI 0 600 so much had already been imposed which she was not to bear. Mr. NEWDIGATE said that he would not troll op al upon the House, and that he would not have treslia L l e e Von' them at all, were it not that he did not think that t!', to the Gentlemen with whom he acted ought tamely to Oho,'" Hong calumnies which had been heaped upon them hY `ii it tlee u Member for Bath. Calumnies which he felt for himself the —and he did not doubt but other Members on his si d ° Ole' as if that 040 House felt the same—were as gross a- they were noodled and mistimed, foul, and invidious, and tinjust.fiable.-,), the cries of " Hear, hear," " Order," " Chair," during "; bir Hon. Member attempted for a short time to proceed.) 0000 Mr. C. BULLER said that the use of such an elrL e ylet° e ; foul calumnies was clearly contrary to the usage of t 'sfeln he. and such as could not be tolerated when used by on ‘, towards another, anti he protested ag t•t Mr. GREENE said that ;he Hon ' . s M ' em . ber was f e „ •t :tor out of order, in the use of the expressions which he had j plied to the speech of the Hon. Member for Bath• nose, (or Mr. NEWDIGATE begged to apologise to the ri c ' eo iol 4 the words which had just fallen from him, but the elP r t hst of the Hon. Member for Bath had been so strong , Cosi felt hound to meet them with terms equally strong' meted ass he was with the county with which .t" . loffe' , Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government wat‘ concerned, he would have been glad to hear his loth ", 7 4 tion of the question which the Hon. Member for He brought forward, and the position which he took tll'• think that if a property-tax we , eto be imposed t hs it would be one way of reaching the absentees from country. But this he thought would he a mise rabi', and if the Honourable Member for Bath at ten -1 1 4 7,0d I' s way to enlist the Members with whom he acted , h e b ; e „ht of l yt would he disappointed, and if he wished, like the t hong, Mancha, to attack windmills, he (Mr. Nevotliga tei for that he could not have taken a more eff-ctive c ourse rt curing his object —( Hear, hear, and laughter.) t his Mr. AIIJINTZ said, that nothing had been said °n ; flue n t ' o s of the subject by which Hon. Members should 4 ,1, 0 0!"" When he saw that gentlemen connected with 'relent, ~,s o there and enjoy the great remission of taxes wh ie „ t hiaj i s joyed by the people of that country, and then give . .„ n ; t i° ( o r it, he did think that there was no sufficient argo t 4 replies to what had been alleged by the Hon. ra i d g 0 s ll i , Bath, and when he saw that those gentlemen °li d tiOos take such large sums from that country, and Op" a illAro various parts of Europe, he felt assured, that next Othe ne absenteeism an imposition on realised property wi ° best tax. aid Mr. ROEBUCK said the best argument which e' o foli e sibly be adduced of correctness in debate was the loss 0 temper.—(" Oh, oh," and disapprobation.) the ilotto Sir H. BARRON said that he felt assured that jo h h ,,1 would feel that the Hon. anti Learned Member for t . ent e . r t o totally failed in establishing his results. Before °, e tti se 1 1 !) , upon the main question, he would beg to show the re s fit L e d, which the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath h at t ylos i t with respect to the attendance of Irish Members in lb % r, t h e n He, would beg to assure the Hon. and Learned 3l er° ble when he imputed the absence of those Members tort 11111 than the real cause, that he evinced only gross an e t I fi - a t ignorance of the characters of those vrhoin he In s4 ,,ettlk s ti that he used expressions in their absence which h e A he 01,a dare to utter if those g entlemen were p a resent ; that Hon. Member to repeat the expressions wl" 0 0 ` .je used, when those Hon. Ge n tle men were present. -- „ of " Hear, hear," " Order, order," Chair, chair. ge-' The CHAIRMAN interposed, and said that the 000 ' tts . ber was out of order. Lescor? Sir H. BARRON said, that what the Hon. a nt '„t i o 'd i e Member said with respect to those Irish Membe rs ~. to 'di e absent was incorrect. But he would now court&Peps facts ; and in giving those facts, he would loots1,,;11 upon any opinion of his own, on th e bat "d i s of this or that man, either in or out of the Hons°' tec l fl t t he returns laid, by order of a , elect Committee appoi n be f o re nit , purpose, on the table of that House. Before It3 ol-- bi of 1 ,,,e1 union with this country took place—the Funded pe, ' de bt tie land was 450,000,000/., and, in the year 1816, t h i ls e titu fse e bt p increased to 764.000,0001. The :rish Debt at , t ,' this .I ' - t i , first mentioned was only 28,000,0001., but, in 18 ,."brest1 3 0 d had accumulated to 118,000,000/. The Debt 01 t of 10 ,p tam had not been doubled in that time, while tha t PIO,' a i cl. art had absolutely quadrupled within the same pert° ,erred .sse return for this burden, what benefits had been eon 'silo re , ay Ireland in the wor taxation? Wh be twee u n sd l' eer' t " 1 1842, as much as 40.000,000/. of annual t y, a xation e- 0 0 0 , di rni'ted to Etieland ; while, in Ireland, the wh" le ii t ssen t -bit relief had been only 2.00 , i• 00/., or hardly o rie. d te l ent part of the remission . of taxes which had been p i s t e e ,reea' ea . country. At the time the union took place, the t,6 7 o .ars oe t entered into was, that Ireland should bear ~e , e et teenths of the whole taxation of the rni ll. e e t b as s what had been the case? Had this ag ree „o adhered to ? No, the amount actually c n t Pr' os 2,-0 1 ,0001. of Ireland, for 15,000,0001. for " re o d wh? ii elit e Mr. Foster, a man of the highest attainments, a ror ds3 t al speaker of the Irish House of Commons, and a"' ties , b A n t biS of that country, loudly appealed against the inJ us ' d - , An ,W vain. He knew something of the state M Irela n to be, e a to atios. ,o oo,l.: be was the deliberate opinion of one whose word t w:a s „ o bjee e ',.o to which Hansard's he e professed Debatesto s p h e e a k found. - ( pentled on, and not of one perfectly ignorant of ue; re fecd which had been 440,000/. was increased in 181 0 t° , o atio n i,ite and in 1816 to 5,760,000/. Another authoritl loess bib' lle th ar al thheear.) 99 " ° I iren°llb would refer was Lord Fitzgerald. No one W h° , o iitiC t. l 4 in ( Sir ff. Barrow) would suspect him of any stret t lg_4 - ire e ;" 0 . boll i for that nobleman, and he might, therefore, _ . ' n o n r ill citin , z him as an authority he was citing the n ott l e eei sei all might depend for evidence on , yt nob 1 06; hand. He would refer to a letter of "" in a pain "hick had been written t i Mr. Foste r ' Reign t r ete, That. Noble Lord then stated that the peonle e n ft to pAY s ,oe o 45 000,000/. of taxes mare than she contract _ 55 ot . ' er s o time of the unions; and yet it was said she e w d 01 , 0 0n e o ss enough ; that the income-tax ought to be nia e , a o. o tO° 4 it was the only panacea for all the ills of Irei to node 1100' confident that every gentleman in the Hom e w n o f the o s iti the question would vote against the propositioht t h e re w in% Member for Bath.—( Hear, hear.) No theug 00 , in s _ t itt, the condition of Ireland that which justified all _ I , , rt? o ,,, el wa pea l , that the income-tax, as it respected Ireland, _ s o d ne laid on a e 0 0, politic and unjust tax. If they hail not . ~, b a y „ I i taxation on Ireland they would, in his opin: i rc guir e ' r, t hey more than their withdrawing er, hear.) Ir e ' t f r ont h.,' coo', 'movement, for by the ParlillonVorde. thel inty 0 had withdrawn a great number of rich I w_ te the!, c on' flexions and friends.—( Hear, hear.) It .wncose the i re ', Enland to make many sacrifices in order to .. n " t 00 ,o t o r. 0 dition of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) At the f ee e a out : 1 ,, / ilf not 90 0 b e& land was over-taxed; there 7. " a s . .h w d WI els Europe with her resources wh" cre w to taxed as Ireland. The landlords of i n ,,_ l2 plaee l it the, greatly injured by the alterations that had _t .ss a:,,_f ac tio t n t , t ilt . tithes, added to which there was a strong (11 . h "; to , e t oo a present moment at the state of Ireland; un n dif f er ettee s a free,: the time was not far distant when all OM _ happ y 5n . ,,,,, tt be laid aside, and Ireland would again beer e e _ ~" e rb s p _se e" ; t oo Ireland could be governed by the heart ea re t ia r nt r had h oos er ti lr e could by the sword.—(Hear, hear.) true th at ! h re' s° t t greatly taxed.—( Hear, hear.) It was bout t° .fle ion e" ; Foca had no found that out, and were a n _ comos iss enid hsv grant for education. They had also u s n e tr t y, a but • w he se. ) to inquire into the state of land in that counner......( H ea i r e ' n 1 tei I , 00 been much better if they had done it s was ea mers ber. anything Colonel CON OILY thought if . von , ~ : : of the sr injure Ireland it was the proposition •I it . t Bath. ,-7FR sa" rtln cHE -,- ".h o uid r e . • o o The CHANCELLOR of the EX A that h e . ' bis ol'lto impossible, holding the situation he withoutdid, s tating ._dineu t , _ this question to come to a decision „ ho uia 1 1 ::: oug ht i "; with respect to it. Whatever credit of , 0 bac not _ ive h a , give the Hon. and Learned Gcntlem. W O " nli t 1 ;4.6 ba , 4 ' • W hich " ass matter forward on many occasions, nuer in eatet a 04 credit for much skill, or the Imlacreate the g r oe sequ eoC r, brought a subject forward that wow (t disastrous. c elf. _.( fle . a v tisfaction in Ireland, and the most co untry st r° f n e s o in perhaps endangering the peace' , ~,,,r es sed '' sleni lwes oo bl hear.) The Hon. Gentleman Ilan ' 1 - of the Irish ~ Ile ° e ar with respect to the absence of man u Y n , Lnt subject. ,lit it 0 , :0 that House during the discussioot. a. :', ot h e th ) li n K s we uld th ' it give no opinion with respe:ct to Horse T " o f Cori n( re sts of et could he s l ab that the British Ict the inn te wou l t i t rr etn consegeetice of that absence. neglect niffht they w ed li be l's country. He was satisfied that bc ,„„°° h a d a ir . s ,_ grin ale to the people of Ireland, and thoge,eunee or . i n t 0 1 0 40 Thee selves from the House, that theyer House 0 d, s 1 'to th e t , '' was was not necessary to enforce the ow „ He now -an:heeler '- _ t o people of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) na mely, i o con e joi di.oe subject before the lions p _,,,,,,, e i s e n ar.) i dditien expedient that they shoul l l ._ ,r„ . ; , l' ae, I the e ()° , i one on real property in Irelanie for n uided bY , ,,, „h i ce %lite, posing all taxes, they must - ..„, the y roii.:. ( , ll _ , i s re „ i i, anal cmcu,nstances of each country; ol_ nai. 5y0u t_t e 0" .,,, ,,,,5e , 0 : be a tax that though it appeared to , l n i ej l 4 . 2 „ e • I v _ . i .ir i:, s tt t ` io , very unequal and v,ry iinjicit. . 1 :'_' ete ' d I , : , 1 qt. u lt of 114 04 14 income-tax for England, lie haLet,':ide. The r es ts , that o,oold subject of an income-tax in Ir . I g, irnpo , o a . „_ nbeci er i iv y quiry was that, though they I " returnsm to rho 1 4 E ti glaTh e st , prove a heavy burden, yet the , silt pitent. _ i --(' ra bb is , 6 be little, if anything, more than , , 4 taxation to ey a " s tom had long baen subject to a - , b eo a ecu , e t ) e ta ' hey ha° e . Ana r bad e t! hear," and laughter. ) r , by direc. t hey 00 - , large amount of revenue , PartlY this e onntrY the v e l,o o ' direct taxation, and throughout 1 , iv ' tax. .., ir fro .e blished a machinery ftr collecting t . 04 , ( 1 upo',o6 u never been 1 P ot 0 1 ' taxes, and others, that had ter woo Therefore wo could hero collect a grea • IRELAND. DUBLIN FEB. 17.—The usual weekly meeting of the Repeal Association, held to-day, in the Conciliation Hall, was very much crowded. Mr. O'Connell made his appear ance amid loud and enthusiastic peals of acclamation. The lion. and Learned Gentleman was accompanied by Robert Dillon Browne, Esq., M.P., William Smith O'Brien, Esq., M.P., Edmund Burke Roche, Esq., M.P., James Kelly, Esq., M.P., Morgan O'Connell, Esq., M.P., P. J. Somers, Esq. M.P., Thomas Davis, Esq, Thomas Macnevin, Esq., and some other members of the Committee. Mr. Macievrx, on the motion of the Member for Lime rick, having been called to the Chair, addressed the meeting at some length. Mr. Jot's O'Coxxer.t., M.P., referred to a subject of some interest in the financial statement of the Prime Minister in Parliament. He confessed he did not take quite the grateful view that others were inclined to take of the benefit which it was thought one portion of his proposition would confer on the people of Ireland. He was fully aware of the benefit that the reduction in the duty on glass would confer on the poorer classes, for it would enable them to have more light, and make their cabins more conducive to the health of the inmates; but their gratitude, or rather, their joy for such a boon, should not make them lose sight of the gross injustice continued upon them by the omissions of the Minister in other respects towards Ireland.—(Cheers.) Mr. O'CONNELL rose amid loud cheers, and announced the receipt of a remittance from the county Louth, and in doing so he took occasion to observe, that when Mr. Montesquieu Bellew was canvassing that county he avowed himself a de termined repealer. That gentleman was now praising Peel, and appeared quite forgetful that he had obtained his scat by professing the strongest repeal principles. He hoped he got something for being a renegade. He (Mr. O'Con nell) pronounced him, from that spot, to be " a most un savoury renegade." At the next election some other person would be returned to represent that noble county—the county Louth ; and if Mr. Bellew showed his face, ugly as it was, it would be handsomer going there than it would be going away. Mr. O'Cossrer.r, again rose, and said he had to hand in 521. lie. from Washington, in the district of Colombia, and 230/. from Baltimore.—(Cheers.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman expressed his deep gratitude, and that of the Association, to their :American friends. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman concluded by moving that it. be referred to a Committee to prepare suitable replies to the American correspondence. Mr. Somens seconded the motion, which passed. Mr. O'CONNELL wished to make an observation or two. in reference to the increased grant to May nooth. He had been informed that Peel intended making the grant 26,000/. per annum, besides which, the buildings were to be repaired, under the superintendence and at the expense of the Board of Public Works. He had been reproached with neglecting to oppose this grant, and reminded of his oft-repeated prin ciple—that every religion should pay its own clergymen. That, certainly, was his principle, and he should like very much to see it carried out ; but, while the Established Church took money from the Catholics and Dissenters, for which it gave no value, he would take all he could get for Maynooth. Mr. R. D. BROWNE, having expressed his full concurrence in the Liberator's observations respecting American sym pathy, referred to the recent speech of Mr. Wakley, in which that Hon. Gentleman alluded to the absence of Irish Members from Parliament, and invited them to come forward and expose the grievances of their country, if any existed. Mr. O'CONNELL proceeded to comment upon the speeches recently delivered by Mr. Wakley in the debates on the Ad dress and the Budget. Mr. Wakley had been made a mouth piece of, to insinuate charges against Irish Members, which were totally without foundation ; and he (Mr. O'Connell) charged him with the grossest ignorance regarding Irish affairs. This ignorance was so " crass," that it seemed to be pretended, and Mr. Wakley- was in the position of " Abegoil, who went to hell without sin." In reply to the demand made by Mr. Wakley, that Irish Members should make a distinct declaration of the measures they required and would be contented with, Mr. O'C. read a number of do cuments published by himself, and other members of the Repeal Association, when the Precursor Society existed, in which the required list of grievances and their remedies, were put forward. Mr. Wakley's ignorance, pretended or real, of these public documents, proved him unfit to legislate for the country, and Ireland could put no confidence in a Par liament composed of such persons. The Hon. Gentleman concluded his speech, which was a comparatively short address, by moving that copies of the reports, and other do cuments, to which he had alluded, should be forwarded to Mr. IVakley by the Secretary of the Association. Mr. E.B. ROCHE seconded the motion. Mr. O'CONNELL mentioned, that on the next day of meet ing he would give notice •f a resolution to the effect, that a petition to Parliament should be prepared, praying for a re peal of those clauses in the Emancipation Act which affected the Jesuits and other regular clergy.—(Cheers.) The rent for the week was announced to be 7511. lOs. sd. SPIRIT of th.-! PUBLIC JOURNALS FROM TITE EVENING PAPERS OP YESTERDAY. GLOBE.—Lord Ashley says—in anticipation that the corn-laws will be thrown in his teeth—that " if he believed the repeal of the corn-laws would place these much suffering thousands of their fellow-creatures in a condition of comfort, and keep them in it, he, in spite 0 , all his predilections, would vote at once for their entire abolition." We do not doubt the sincerity of his Lord ship's assertion ; but we doubt whether he seizes exactly the point of view in which alone the corn•lavvs would be objected to his regulative proposals by any reasonable opponent. We have never, for our part, undertaken to sly that no regulation of infant labour was necessary ; though we have frequently declared ourselves against in terference with that of adults. And when the condi- Cons of adult labour have been stated to be widely unsatisfactory, we have affirmed that no direct regula tions about them could render them otherwise—and that the defect must lie in the demand existing—or wages available—for labour. It is as affecting these that the policy of Food-Restriction has, by ourselves and others, been held to render nugatory the policy of Employment-Regulation. For example, if a hedger and ditcher, in Lord Ashley's neighbourhood let us say, in Dorsetshire, is seen to be seeking piece-work with the greatest anxiety, and doing it at the lowest rates, in dear years—the dearth of corn is deemed to have some con nexion with the excessive toil of that man. Regulation of the hours of hedging and ditching, it is not imagined would materially mend the matter ; and would only alter it by dividing employment (already scarce salli merit fur one man's wants) between two or more. In a word, if it is dearth of subsistence that stimulates this over-toil, no regulation (that does not increase the supply of subsistence) can prevent the consequence of dearth showing itself in one shape or other. The shape of extreme toil is that which is chosen by those who can find work. That may be forbidden, in this or the other instanr.e—but extremity of some kind must be suffered ; and extreme toil will, after all, not be pre vented, without inspectors for every cottage, every fie:d, every hedge and ditch. Turning to manufactures — slackness of demand, competition of workers, readi ness for over-hours, will in like manner show them selves. The plague of dearth is at the root of all —men or women do not volunteer intense toil from love of suffering. You undertake to stop the intense toil. In the great proportion of cases (cases, namely, outside the walls of factories) you cannot stop it. In cases in which you can, it may happen that you stop the power of snaking up orders, of dispatching shipments—of competing with unrestricted employers in foreign markets. If you do this—all you do is to force capital to fly from the seats of your distressed labour. If you stop short of doing this, you stop short of doing great mischief—but in any case yon stop short necessarily of cutting up the misery by the roots. The Anti-Corn-law advocates, with reference to measures like Lord Ashley's for regulating employ ments, assume that the corm-laws do produce periodical dearth of subsistence, slackness of employment, and consequent lowness of wages, and over-work. They assume that those only who are distressed to live are likely to distress themselves by toil ; and they infer that no remedy, which does not touch the former distress, can ever meet the latter. All this, of course, proceeds on the assumption that we are right in our theory of the corn-laws. That assumption granted, there is nothing unreasonable in bringing it to bear on there Time-Bill questions. RAILWAY COMMITTEES. The Sub-Committee appointed to ascertain if the promoters of the Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole Rail way had complied with the standing orders of the Howse of Commons, re-assembled yesterday at 2 o'clock, ..ind proceeded with the investigation. After sitting for ab , mt an hour the Committee concluded their labours wit h :snowing about 16 out of 98 trivial objections which had been urged against the project by Mr. Platt, the Parlia mentan agent, on behalf of Mr. G. I. Smyth, of Heath Hall, Wakefield, who had entered a protest against the scheme, declaring it to be unnecessary and uncalled for. The Chairman, Sir John Yarde Buller, intimated to the agent of the promoters that it was the intention of the Comtnitteo to report specially on the line, and there was no doubt the objections would be overcome on being re ferred to a Select Committee on Standing Orders. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH , Feb. 19. (Sittings at Nisi Prius at Guildhall before Lord Da we and a Common Jury.) SMYTH V. SMITH. This was an action for false imprisonment brought under the following circumstances :—The plaintiff and defendant entered into partnership in August, 1843, for the purpose of printing publications of various kinds, but a disagreement shortly oc curred between them. They had a quantity of t vpe, which was at the defendant's office, in Mincing-lane. (in the 13th of August the plaintiff went with a person named Griffin, and others, to the defendant's, and haying broken open an inner door, they were taking away the type, when the defendant perceived them, and gave Griffin in charge of a policeman. The plaintiff said, " Who is to take me?" whereupon he also was given in charge. They were conveyed to the station-house, and were afterwards taken to the Mansion -house. They were charged with felony, but ther ,,,,, e ornu w dw e D r b e Ezirni n eu l . ! N r t o h u ia n grounds fortio action. such an accusation. The defend ant defendant'sn od bt I charging the jury, said that there was plaintiff acted wrong in breaking through the door; ut that did not justify the defendant in preferring a char ge o f felony against him. The plaintiff was entitled to their verdict, but to what amount it was entirely for verdict for the plainti ff.— Damages one T t h li c the jury found to say. ia. farthing. MEDICAL REFORM BILL. An HoN. Mrstnxit presented a petition, signed by the surgeons of Wrexham and its neighbourhood, against the Medical Reform Bill. Mr. HOGG presented a petition from certain East India sugar growers, praying for a reasonable protection again.t the importation of foreign sugar; also from the East India and China Association, expressing apprehension on account of the proposed discriminating duty between Muscovado and clayed sugar—an attempt which, the petitioners stated, must be attended with trouble, delay, vexation, and fraud. . . Lord SANDON presented a petition from the Liverpool Peace Society against the proposed additional grant for the navy. Also a petition from certain tradesmen of Bethnal green, praying the House to take measures to prevent the de secration of the Sabbath. Lord ARUNDEL presented a petition from Burton, in Lonsdale, in the county of York, against the increase of li censes granted for the sale of intoxicating liquors. NOTICES OF MOTION.—COLONIAL ACCOUNTS. Dr. BOWRING gave notice that to-morrow he would move for sundry returns relating to colonial accounts. WINDOW-TAX. Lord DUNCAN gave notice of his intention, on a future day, to bring forward the following motion :—" That the taxes levied on windows were a great burden en the country—unjust and unequal in their operation, most oppressive on those who had to bear them, and ought therefore to be immediately repealed." While he was on his legs he would take the oppor tunity of answering the question put to him the other evening by the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government, who, he regretted to see, was not in his place. It appeared to be the general opinion that they should go on with the adjourned debate to-morrow evening, and, as he understood all other Honourable Gentlemen who had notices on the paper for that night agreed to postpone them, it would be most injudicious in him if he persisted in pressing his motion. He, therefore, begged leave to give notice that he would bring on his motion on the subject of the window-tax on Monday evening, on the question being put that the Speaker leave the Chair to go into a Committee of Supply.—( Hear, hear. ) Sir WILLIAM CLAY moved that the petition of George Smith, distiller, and James Scott Smith, rectifier, presented 18th February, be printed.—Ordered. HOUSE OF KEYS. _ . _ Dr. BOWRING moved for copies of any memorials which have been presented to her Majesty's Government from the Isle of Man on the snbject of a reform of the House of Keys.— Ordered. RAILWAYS-MORNING SITTINGS. On the reading of the orders of the day fur Committees On the following Bills :—Companies Clauses Consolidation Bill ; Railway Clauses Consolidation Bill; Lands Clauses Consolida tion Bill; Lands Clauses Consolidation ( Scotland) Bill; Rail way Clauses Consolidation ( Scotland) Bill ; Companies Clauses Consolidation ( Scotland) Bill, Lord G. SOMERSET rose, and was supposed to say that he intended to have proposed that those Committees should proceed by morning sittings to-morrow, but, on considera tion, he thought Friday would be better. His Lordship's state ment, though of considerable length, was delivered in so low a tone, that it was entirely lost in the gallery. Mr. HAWES, who was almost equally indistinct, wit un slerstood to ask whether the Noble Lord intended to make this arrangement compulsory ? Mr. AG LIONBY said he felt deeply interested in this sub ject, and therefore had listened with attention, in order to en-. deavour to catch the Noble Lord's words ; but he regretted to say that not one word that the Noble Lord had said had been heard by either him (Mr. Aglionby), or any one else at his side of the House.—( Hear, hear.) But, he would ask, was he right in presuming that the Noble Lord intended that those Committees should hold sittings, and those sittings should take place on Friday. If that be se, he (Mr. Aglionby) was rather unfortunate in being obliged to object to that arrangement, as he had already made appointments for that day which woul•1 prevent his at tendance. On Friday morning he would be obliged to attend as Chairman of a Committee on private Bills, and, therefore, it would be quite impossible for him to attend on that day upon his Lordship's Com mittees. It was not for him (Mr. Aglionby) to say whether the Noble Lord had acted right or not in snaking this arrangement ; but others might be placed in a situation similar to his (Mr. Aglionby's), and in addition to that, he would say it was rather to be regretted that those morning sittings had been fixed at so early a period of the session.—( Hear. ) Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET assured the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Aglionby) that it was for the general con venience of the House he had appointed Friday. SIR J. GRAHAM'S RAILWAY SPECULATION. Sir J. GRAHAM said that as the House was on the subject o f railways he thought he might be allowed to correct an error in fact into which he had fallen when he last addressed the House on the subject of railways. On that occasion he stated that he had never had any connexion with railroads in his life. The general statement was perfectly true, but it was made in forget fulness of the fact that when he had the honour of representing Carlisle a railroad was projected, which, it was supposed, would be of advantage to that city. On that account he purchased a share of 100/.—( Laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh ")—which he need not assure the House he sold without any view to profit. POST-OFFICE ESPIONAGE. Mr. MONCKTON MILN ES said that he wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman a question of which he had given notice the other night, and in putting that question he wished to do it with all deliberation. When last he had named this matter in the House he had deemed it better to give notice to the Right Honourable Gentleman of his intention to put this question, and to ask what -, : instructions had been sent out to the agent of this country abroad, with respect to the matter on which he intended to speak, and this he did because he believed it to be a matter of much interest in that House. The question, then, which he wished to ask was whe ther. at the time that representations were made to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the insurrection which was likely to ensue in the Italian States against the Government of Austria, any instruction had been sent out by Lord Aber deen to the Governor or other authorities in the Island of Corfu, that the British Government were in possession of information respecting such insurrectionary movement, and whether any information or other intimati•es had been given to the persons at that time in the places under the dominion of the British Government, who were likely to engage in such insurrectionary movement, of their designs being known, and of its having been communicated to the Austrian and Italian Governments the movements that were likely to take place, and the persons of the parties who were likely to he enraged in them? Sir ROBERT PEEL said, I am happy to give an ample, and I think a sufficient answer to this question. As the Hon. Member has given notice of the nature of his question, proper attention has been paid to the subject. The Hon. Member has said that a deep interest was felt in this question, and I believe he is perfectly correct in that statement ; and he should, therefore, feel it his duty to give a full reply to that question. But lam sorry to say that 1 cannot do so, Sir, without entering fully into the question.—(Hear, hear.) I hope the House will excuse this, and 1 will give the information we possess as bristly and suc cinctly as I can.—( Hear, hear. ) When the British Go vernment last year received information that an insurrec tionary movement was contemplated in the Italian States, they felt it their duty to put the Austrian and Italian Governments on their guard, and particularly as this movement was organised by individuals residing at that time in possessions under the protection of the British Go vernment. In reply to this, they had been informed that some parties engaged in that movement were resident in this coun try. His Noble Friend had also been informed that the Aus trian Government Thad given instructions to the General at that time in command of their forces at Milan, to the effect, that if any attempt was made to trespass on the Austrian ter ritories by insurrectionists from the Papal states, in which it was believed the insurrection was chiefly organised, to resist and destroy the rebels to the utmost of his power, without any further reference to his Government. There were certain intimations conveyed to us which led us to apprehend great danger te the public tranquillity in the shape of an insurrectionary movement in Italy. My Noble Friend did convey to the Austrian Government, from time to time, the general purport of any information which he re ceived in respect to tho proceedings of those who had designs against the tranquillity of Italy.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") He communicated no letter which he had received or extracts from any letter, neither did he state the name of any individual within the power of the Austrian Government. But as it is stated in the report of the Select Committee, he did from time to time communicate to the represen tatives of the Austrian Government in this country, the general purport of any information connected with the designs of those who resided within the dominions of her Majesty—particularly in the Mediterranean—caleulated to disturb the public tranquillity. The parts with respect to which apprehensions were chiefly entertained were in the Papal States. My Noble Friend has not a very perfect recollection of the circumstances, having destroyed such letters as ho re ceived, except those of a public nature. He has not now a distinct recollection of the purport of them; bat, as far as his recollection serves him, he never saw any communication of a public or private nature which led him to apprehend that a particular attack was to be made from Corfu. At any rate, be never took any steps whatever on such communications ; he never communicated either to the Austrian Government, the Neapolitan Government, or to the authorities at Borne ; he uccer made any communication to them respecting any par. ticular designs meditated in Corfu. Consequently, the impression which some gentlemen appeared to entertain, that these individuals were led into a trap by an act of the British Government, is entirely without foundation. So little reason had he to apprehend that any particular attempt would be made from Corfu, that no communication whatever on the subject was made to Lord Seaton, the Gover nor of the lonian Islands. The fact is, that the at tempt tosk every party by surprise—it took Lord Seaton by surprise, and it took the Consul completely by surprise. With out referring to the dispatches, he would state to the House what were the facts. It appears that there were residing in Mita, in the lonian Islands, several persons, refugees from their own country, on account of political disturbances. They were permitted to reside there without molestation. The two suns of Admiral Bantliera resided at Corfu. They conducted them selves very quietly, without exciting Suspicion_ on the part of the Government of the lonian Islands. It ap pears that on the night of the 12th of June twenty-two individuals, and twenty-two individuals only, left Corfu in two small boats, without arms, and no preparation whatever was made for directing a foreign attack. It was not until after that expedition—if it could be ealled an expedition, which consisted of twenty-two unarmed individuals, who sailed from Corfu —that the Austrian Consul for the Paps! States, and the Russian Consul, made strong representations to Lord Seaton on the subject. '1 hey remonstrated strongly aeainst it. Lord Seaton said he had been taken by surprise, or he would have made previous communication. The Austrian Consul requested that the British war-steamer there should be sent after the boats con taining the twenty-two individuals. Lord Seaton said he de clined sending an armed steamer in order to arrest them; that he was not authorised to do so ; and that he thou"ht the reports were exaggerated. Lord Seaton said that ho felt confident no invasion could be contemplated on the coast of Calabria, but he would send a small boat as quietly as possible to Otranto, in order to ascertain the nature of the project. That boat had not sailed to Otranto till after the 12th, on the night of which the twenty-two individuals had set sail. Intelligence of this was given to the authorities there that it might be conveyed to Naples; but no information upon this subject had , .....-,.... A .