The Sun. — London, England, 1851-05-09 00:00:00

THE SUN, it t ute• Tt e brei bsen adveeaeai for the purpose of meeting the case of the hop-growed, but ha feared it , w ould ,e be rath e r an ex p ens i ve mo d e o f accomplishing the object, r.)..f. But w ere the agriculturists to accept the repeal of Ibis tax as an equivalent fur the repeal of the corn lsws ? Would they take it as an ultimatum ? He doubted whethe r th e l ea d ers o f th e party would agree to te that,_ for they might rely on it that the result would be the imposition of taxe s which would press still mo re heavily on the landed interest. Mr. WODELIOUSE expressed his regret th at the motion had been brought torward, and felt it his duty to v ote against it. Thi r ty years ago he had voted in favour ()t a repeal of the duty, and if the state of the country Were the sa me now as th en he should be tempted to take the same course. But the point which governed him t4 ,s, that at th e p resen t m oment there existed an abso lute prohibition against the importation of ma lt ; and, although foreign malt might not immediately c o m e in n great quantities, yet the measure mu st inevitabl y have an immediate effect on the finer qualities of barley, and affect those counties adapted to its growth, and w ould extend to others. When the proposition was made tw years ago, he gave notice of an amendment , in hopes tlsa°t a remedy might have been found in the adoption of a moderate duty ; but the question of duties seemed to be expl o d e d . M r. H us ki sson 's policy was a system of mo derate duties, which aff rded security to the grower, without injuring the consumer, and it was a subject of Permanent regret that those views had been entirely %bandoned. It was his firm conviction that if a duty !ren of so moderate an amount as 3s. a quarter on wheat a nd 2s. on th e m i nor grains, were imposed, every rea sociiltible person would be satisfied, and he did not kno w f • any material part of the community that would be in- J . Fed. T o ta k e off t h ese d ut i es, h oweve r, must bring the tio vernment of the country to a state of financ ial weak acts, and on this ground he justified the vote he was about to give. Mr. FREWEN supported the motion. The tax which it proposed to remove was exorbitant, and operated as a l e e ry strong ind uceme nt to adulteration, especially a mon g country brewers, and the result was, that a great quan tity of the beer sold was not the produce of malt and na• Nothing could make this more clea r than the fact, rat the quantity of malt made at the present time was not more than the quantity made seventy years ago. In 10 30 there were 30805,100 bushels made, the duty b ein g Is4 ide and the consumption being at the rate of four t ,_ l inels er head. The quantity had remained very much same p down to the present time, tuthough the popnla- Fon had so enormous ly increased. In 1844, 30,508,840 bushels were ma d e, t h e ma l t -t ax having been increased to 23 . 10d. a b us h e l. a nd the consumption per head was 1 bushel ett gallons. The population in 1780 was 7,814,827, and in 1845, 16,711,725.—(Hear.) Malt was an article which might be very advantageously used in f a ttenin g ea ttiet and there was a great quantity of soil of inferior quality—he knew of many thousands of acres in the eastern division of Sussex of this description, which } might be profitably employed in the growth o f barle y in purpose of being converted into ma lt. These, his opinion, were reasons q uite su ffi cient to justify a L'lreain taki ng ever y opportunity of urging, year after year, the removal of this most heavy and unjust tax. e thought the Chancellor of the Excequr ought to out another tax as a substitute for h this, e and he did not think the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with his ability, would have any very great di ffi cult y in doin g so. e should like to see the tax totally repealed, but the unrest and safest way would be to have a gradual redac tion in the mode be bad suggested in a motion upon the Paper. If his plan were adopted. the tax would be re pealed in about five years and a half. Mr. G. SANDARS considered the lion. Gentleman elusion24yley) had given no sufficient reason for the con ; to which he wished the House to come. With would to the argument that the removal of the tax roilld increase the consumption of beer, it appeared to h im that pop u l ar t a ste of late had greatly changed — that _ and coffee were largely consumed, while intoxicating liquors were less regarded. The Hon. Gentleman here Went into some calculations to show the effect of the repeal of the tax with reference to foreign malt impor tation. He considered (we understood) tha t malt would ue largely imported into the country from the Baltic P o rts. The Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Cayley) had referred to the advantages which would result to the la bouring classes, but he did not agree in that statement. Good beer might now be brewed for 2d . or 3d. p er quart, w hi c h was charged by the retail dealer at 6 d• or Bd. If the labouring classes did not brew their beer now, when it was so much ti' their ad- Vantage, why should it be assumed they would make it if the repeal were carried? It had also been said that the poorer classes would make their own malt, but this Was quite absurd. lie really believed if the tax were repealed that very few persons, as at present, would be induced to brew their own beer. As to the assertion of monopoly, that, too, was a fallacy. He could assure the Ron. Member that maltsters did not make large pro fits. The large profits were made by the brewers, not by the maltsters. It was said that the repeal of the tax would be a relief to the agricultural interest. If he Could bring himself to believe such would be the effect, he would support the motion, but as his opinion was different, and he felt that we could not spare 5,000,0001. of revenue, he would vote against the proposition. The Bon. Member for Derby proposed to repeal half the tax, but that would not do much good as it would not do sway with the present vexatious regulations. To show how vexatious the regulations were, he would state there were in 1847 upwards of 300 prosecutions for alleged violations of the law. He felt bound, there fore, to oppose the motion. ' Mr. H. DRUMMOND was not going to urge argu ments that had been often before urged ; but he would beg leave to say a few words on behalf of a class of in dividuals whose claims were often talked of but seldom really heeded. He must first express his surprise at the speech of the Honourable Member (tir. Sanders), who talked about malt improving by a twelvemonth's confinement in the hold of a ship. This was only one of the singularities of that Honourable Gentleman's speech. Leaving that Honourable Gentleman where he was, be Would ask the Right Honourable Gentlemen and Hon. Gentlemen opposite, who began by an appeal to the biasses—tile very ground he always took—to give a rea son why they made such a clamour about cheap bread, and yet refused to stir a step about cheap beer.—(Hear, he ar.) The official return which he had referred to Preyed that the consumption of spirits had greatly increased of late years. The average consumption was 1 gallon per head for England, 1 gal 'on per head for Ireland, and 2 gallons per head Per annum for Scotland.—(Hear, hear.) This large increase, he believed, was greatly owin g to the tax en malt. The Honourable Gentleman asked where they would find a tax that pressed so little on the community. But what was the definition of the community with rela tion to this tax. The community that paid this tax was almost exclusively the agricultural labourers.—( oll , no.) Eon. Members said no. How muc h beer did Hon. Members opposite drink or pay for during the year? It was a curious circumstance that the consumption of malt had not increased notwithstanding the large increase of Population. In making an appeal to the House for the removal of a tax it was the fashion to place it on the ground of a relief to the poor. His rule was, lay taxes on income or on houses, or any other property, but take them off the poor. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was afraid he must apologise to the House, as the Hon. Member for the North Riding had declared little new could be said cn the subject, for repeating arguments which he had used before on the same subject; but he would do so as briefly as ho could. The Hon. Member opposite (Mr. Drummond) appeared to him - to entertain some odd notions about the amount which the agricultural labourers contributed to the revenue by their consumption of beer. If they were really the main consumers, then their condition could hardly be so bad as had been insisted on by their advo eates.—(Llear, hear.) He was surprised to bear his Hen. Friend speak of the inquisitorial and obj ectionablo nature of the tax. The greatest authorities who had inquired into the subject, uniformly represented that if a large amount of revenue was to be raised, there was haroty any tax by which it could be raised so cheaply, and respecting which the inconveniences were so small. The tax produced nearly 5.200.0001., and in the report which was made by Commissioners who were appointed to inquire some time ago into the subject, it was stated wasthat h theard hardly a x possibleoccasioned to showlittle s in convenience , o l e n s y s eni ence,and that it the malt-tax; it was less felt and objectionable less injurious than any other tax i n; emagnitu de .ude add ition to which, same no other tax of the w as collected at so small an expense. He to the opinions of Mr. Barclay, an em i nen t b rew er, and Mr. Joseph Taylor, of Bishops Stortford, some five years ago, in confirmation of the character of the tux. The Right Han. Gentleman read the questions put to th s two com gentlemen and their re p lies, which P e pletely bore out his assertions. Now, if a large amount of revenue was produced by the tax—if it was collected more c h ea ply than any other tax—and if the interfererce the Excise officers with the manufacturer, as bad been declared by the two practical men whose evidence he had referred to, was not onerous and objectionable, then he thought a strong case bad been made out in favour of the tax. He entirely concurred in the view of th e Ron. Gentleman that the tax was paid by the consumer, H e was quite ready to admit that the . tax might i nter f ere with the demand for the article; for that was in the na ture of all taxes to have such an effect; but be would say, if it were necessary to have 5,000,0001. of .revenue, it was impossible to obtain it by any tax less injurious to the consumer and the producer. The lion. Gentle man stated that the consumption of malt bad _not in creased in the same prop ortion as ten coffee, and c oco a, from which articles the du t y had b e en partly remove d; that the increase in the co nsum p tion of beer bore proporti on t o the increase in the consum p tion of those to other articles. This was to be attributed, not i effect of the malt-tax, but to a c han g e in our bah tha . etenge drank less beer than our forefathers; and tt and labou m r i i g u h g t el a a l s s s o es. be Ttbreaceddutythoronngtheaouwt t s h e t w m i cie a d dl e s high as th e duty on malt. in proportion to the price o f the article, so that it' they were to reduce the duties of the highest amount, it was clear that tea should get a preference from them over malt. The con sumption of intoxicating liquors had of late y ears been decreasing, w hil e th e consumption of drinks which were not of an intoxicating character had been increasing, and ho looked upon that as a proof of a happy ch an g e in the habits of th e people. His Hon. Friend (Mr. Cayley) anticipated a great reduction in the price of beer if the malt duty should be repealed. But he be lieved that the expectations of his Hon. Friend upon that point were very much exaggerated. In the Com• mittee to which he had already referred Mr. Baker, of - Writtle, who was one of the principle advocates for that change, bad stated it as his belief that if the duty ore malt were repealed the reduction in the price of beer would amount to 100 per cent. Now he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) conf , ssed he was at a loss to understand how such a reduction could t he place, because if the price of any article were reduced by 100 per cant, there would be no price whatever left to pay for it.—(A I..uge) That was an example of the sort of arguments they sometimes heard upon subjects of that description. But he fund that past experience might teach them to distrust the expectations which some persons enter tained of any considerable diminution in the price of beer in consequence of a repeal of the malt-tax. About 25 years ago they had reduced the duties imposed On strong beer in the shepti ofrealt duty and beer dtuy by about 705., and they had reduced the duties on ordinary beer by about 50e; and as they had been told that those re ductions had not led to any considerable increase in the price of barley, or to any considerable decrease in the price of beer, he did not see how a reduction of about 215., which was the amount of the present malt duty, could be reasonably expected to be productive of any great benefit, either to the grower of malt or to the con sumer of beer. Mr. Barclay, the great brewer, to whom he had already referred, had stated in his evidence be fore that Committee that the utmost reduction in the price of beer which would follow from a repeal of the malt tax could not amount to more than a halfpenny a quart; and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) be lieved that such a reduction would be too dearly pur chased by the loss of 5.000:0001. a year to the revenue. His Hon. Friend had to ld them that the duty operated as a great discouragement to the brewing of their own beer by private individuals. Bat he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not think it could well be said to lead to any such result. He believed that in the south of England private individuals did not deem it advisable to brew their own beer; but in his part of the country every farmer and labourer brewed his own beer. He was inclined to think that a considerable stimulus would be given to the illicit distillation of spirits if the malt tax were repealed; and that was a result which it would be desirable, if possible, to avoid. The great question they had to con sider was, how they could replace the 5,000,0001. derived from the malt-tax, or how they could raise that amount in any less objectionable manner. The House had decided the other night that the income-tax, which produced about the same sum, should be renewed for a year only, and any Government must be placed in a po sition of great financial difficulty when so large an amount of taxation depended on an annual vote. If Hon. Gentlemen meant to get rid of the income-tax as soon as possible, how could they , as men of common sense determine on at once removing 5,000,000!. derived from the malt-tax?—(Hear.) It they repealed the malt tax, where, he would ask, was the possibility of their getting rid of the income-tax in any conceivable time? It would surely be absurd to resolve to get rid of a tax which brought in 5,000,0001. a year, and then to follow up that vote by a resolution to get rid of another tax of the same a mount which would render the attainment of the object of their first decision absolutely impossible. Hon. Gentlemen opposite were disposed to get rid of the income-tax, and Hon. Gentlemen on his side of the llouee were anxious to effect reductions in the great articles of consumption; but neither object could be realized if they were to get rid of the 5,000,0001. derived from the malt tax. He knew no tax of equal amount which was so cheaply and easily collected as the malt tax, or which was so evenly distributed over the whole population of the country, and he should therefore feel it his duty to vote against the motion. Mr. DISRAELI said—l wish to express in a very few words the reasons why I shall give the vote which I in tend to offer upon this subject. I admit that if this case were one simply of fiscal remission it might be of easy disposal. I admit the force of those circumstances to which the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer alluded in the l atter p art of his speech. I admit that after the vote which the House came to on Friday night on the income-tax, this question occupies a very different position from that which it occupied during the last session of Parliament; end I um per fectly willing to admit that any Gentleman who voted far the repeal of the malt-tax last session, at ter the vote at which the House arrived the other night with respect to the income-tax, is perfectly free to take a different course upon the present occasion. But I cannot look noon this question as a mere question of fiscal remis sion. —(Hear, hear.) Nor will I consider it with refe rence to the perhaps higher consideration of the interest of the labourer. His interest has been brought most clearly before the consideration of the House by my Honourable Friend the Member for Surrey (Mr. H. Drummond). We must all sympathise with the view which my Honourable Friend expressed upon that subject with so much frankness in his speech. I confass I was somewhat surprised at the expressions used by the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer upon that point. The Right Hon. Gentle man says, " What is a halfpenny in a quart of beer?"_. (Hear, hear.) But when we hear of a halfpenny in a quertern loaf we are told there will be a revolution.— (Hear, hear.) It is not , however, m y intention to touch even upon that importa nt to p ic. I must look at this question under the same light, and influenced by the same feelings in a great degree to those which actuated me in the vote which I gave upon this subject last year. I look upon this tax with reference to its influence on the capital of the most suffering class of the community. —(Hear, hear.) Their position has been brought under the notice of the House under circumstances which call fir our moat serious consideration. The sufferings of tho occupiers of land ere universally andauthori tatively acknowledged. It is difficult to estimate the degree of those sufferings; it is difficult to calculate and ascertain the amount that has been lost by the farmers of this country by recent changes in our legislation. — (Hear, hear.) Night after night we have had various estimates offered to us of the amount of those losses, and without any exception those estimates have been offered to us by gentlemen who sit on the benches opposite. The very boast which they indulge in of the amount of gain which has accrued to what they call the community by the change in the laws which regulated the importation of agricultural produce, is in fact an estimate of the loss which accrued to the British occupiers of the soil.— (Hear, bear.) We have had one estimate, which I must always accept as the official statement of the amount of that loss. Last session a distinguished Member of this House (Mr. C. P. Villiers) —a gentleman who never indulges in loose phraseology, and who is perfectly master of this interesting subject—in moving the address, told us, amidst the assenting cheers of the Treasury bench, that the gain to what he called the community by the change in those laws was in fact a transference of capital from the occupiers of the soil to that community to the amount of not less than 90,000,0001, per annum. We hear mach of the question of the laws which regulate the importation of foreign produce being a landlord ques tion, being a question of rent; but, inasmuch as the whole rent of the United Kingdom is only 60, 00 00,001., the farmers must. according to that estimate, have lost at least 30,000,0001, even if no rent had been exacted from them. But admitting even what perhaps lam not authorised to admit, a reduction of rent to the amount of 20,000,000 a, the 109 a 8 to the farmers,and that loss is an increasing one, must have amounted to at least 70,000,0001., according to that estimate which was the foundation of the address which we offered to the Throne. You have here, then, a class which, according to your own statement, according to your own data, have experienced a delapidation of capital which has never yet been equalled in the experience of any other class in this country; and what is the remedy offered by the Ministers of the Crown to that class? It is, to give up the cultivation of wheat, while at the same time you ' are maintaining laws under which you raise in one branch of your revenue, namely, your inland taxation, two-thirds of its large amount from another crop of the British farmer—(Hear)—thut crop being one which, in consequence of the alteration in your laws, and in conse quence of the advice of your Ministers, he would natu rally havo recourse to in order to obtain some compen sation for the change in your legislation.—(Hear, hear.) I never heard that question properly met. You can only meet it by arguments which totally contradict all those principles which you on other occasions profess. You can only meet it by proving that restriction is a benefit. You can only meet it by demonstrating that large im ports do not check consumption.—(Hear, hear.) lam willing to admit that that is a rash principle which would pull to pieces too rudely the financial system of this country. I have never concealed my wish that this tax should be maintained. I have never concealed my wish that the whole system of our local taxation should, if possible, be continued. But this I say—that it is im possible you can maintain your malt-tax—that it is im possible you can continue to raise from the people of this country a large revenue separate from the general reve nue which you otherwise raise—that it is impossible you can continue to do this if you establish a system of un equal taxation—(Hear, hear) —and if you do not do that to the agriculturists which Mr. Ricardo sanctioned, which Mr. M•Culloch recommended, which the first lights in political economy have invariably advocated, both in their speeches and in their writings—if you du not place the cultivators, the owners, and the occupiers of the soil on the same level with the ether classes of the community.—(Cheers.) I heard the other night— and I heard it, to my surprise, from the lips of a man from whom I should never have expected to have heard such a sentiment —that he recognised no difference between a protective duty and the new-fashioned term of what the Right Hon. Gentleman called a coun teracting duty. Now I entirely protest against such a position. The question of protection has nothing to do with an adjustment of taxation that shall place the cul tivator of the soil on the same level with the other closes of the community.—(Hear, hear.) If you choose to adopt a system of protection—that is, a system of bene fits or of disadvantages, in which the cultivator of the fiscal arrangement soil shall take his share—we have nothing to do with that; hut if you choose to establish e system of taxation by which you raise from one class a large amount to which the others do not contribute, you must by some Ri cardo-- Q s as duty the same place this extra contributing class on. by the very leveloth of taxation—l use the words of Mr. Ri haer classes. The elements of the counter actingports of foreign pro s c t l men been analysed, ascertained, and fixed free trade—who first fi w r ho first advocated what you now call so great a discovery, advocated that system of free im ucewhich you now consider to be Butleracting the agricultural claes P es e r commended us to al These were the men who first ro te for the extra taxation of now we are told that a coubnteracting counteracting duties; and observe the position to te whichc ive y duty h have driven identical, üby a duty and a pro justice which can never in the long run agricul tural class does not come forward an s d u a l l The Wl s U a O ti t v i e nC f U a' hear.) They s you ll for coun your reproaches that they are teracting duties.—(Hear, asking or w l l legislative incur Yours to which they are not entitled; th ey the falsely excited odium which you yourselves created r by stating that they want to place a tax on the bread of the people. But this they ask of you—" Place us on a be scuochcerssefgf level of taxation with the rest of the community—(Hear, hear) —and inasmuch as by this malt -tax, according to the highest authorities, you have placed on us a burden which the other classes do not share, inasmuch as by your system of local taxation you raise mainly from the soil a large revenue for the purposes of the community, to which the community does not contribute, we ask you in the new state of affairs to relieve us from these bur dens; but if you think it better that these burdens should remain, if it is your opinion that it is for the advantage of the community that that tints ion of a particular class should continue to subsist, if you consider that the ati• vantages of self-government ere so great, and that the facilities of raising this tax of 5,000,000/. ought net to be lightly lost, then it is for you to come forward and offer the terns on which you wish to retain those ad vantages. But never shall it be represented to us that we come forward to ask fur counteracting duties oa account of the disedrantages to which we are subjected. We now accept the principles of your new system, and upon this we ask you, according to the dictates of financial justice, to rid us of the grievances under which we suffer." It is under the influence of these views that I shall give the vote which I am about to give for the motion of the Honourable Member for the North Riding of Yorkshire, who on this, as on other occasions, has, with a vial which all must admire and a knowledge which all acknowledge, brought this subject before the House. I think it impolitic that we should terminate a mode of levying a large branch of our revenue, such as the malt-tax. I think it most impolitic and inexpedient that we should take refuge from the burdens of local taxation in the new-fangled and dan gerous system of what is called " national rates;" hut I cannot shut my eyes to the inevitable consequences of the tatal policy which you are pursuing. —(Hear. hear.) I cannot shut iny;eyes to the fatal consequences of a sys tem which is exacting a larger amount of taxation from the land of the United Kiugdum, at the very moment when, under your legislation, it is enduring great trials and great losses.—(Hear, hear.) I know that every day and every hour that conviction must become more and more pressed upon the minds of that great body of the community who are immediately interested in the culti vation of the soil; and that session after session you will be more and more powerfully and sternly called on to adjust your taxation to the principles of political justice. —(Hear, hear.) It is under these circumstances that I shall give the vote which I mean to give to-night in favour of the motion of the Hon. Gentleman. I shall give it as a protest against the course which you are pursuing—a course which I believe, in the first instance, to be unjust, and, in the next instance, to be injurious. But if the Go vernment would come forward and meet this question with frankness; if they would tell us that it is of great ad vantage to the community that this extra taxation should be exacted from the land, and that they did not shrink from measures of equitable adjustment which would place the cultivators of the soil on the same level with the rest of the community, then I should be glad to sup port measures which the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer has spoken of as so expe dient; and then I should feel that I could, with some appearance of fairness, with some regard for the prin ciples of political justice, refuse that appeal which prac tically is made by the lion. Member for the North Riding of Yorkshire, that we should place the land of England on the same level of taxation as the other great interests in this country.—(Hear.) Mr. FULLER said that be took up this question as affecting the labouring population; and he looked on it as the most injurious, most obnoxious, and one of the most tyrannical taxes that had ever been levied on the country. It pressed heavily on the labourers, as, if bread were their staple food, beer was their staple drink. A labourer, aged 91, who was examined before the Poor-law Committee some years ago, on being asked by Mr. Harvey, " Do you remember the condition of the labourer during your life?" replied, " Yes; when I married I could have a bushel of malt for 2s. 6d., and every person had a barrel of beer to drink in stead of water." Mr. Hodges, M.P. for Kent, asked him, " Did the labouring man in former times use to brew as a general thing?"—" Yes." " How long have they left it off ? "—" Ever since malt got to such a price that they could not buy it." "Do you know any poor men who brews his own beer? "—" Not one." "Do you remember the rate of wages when malt was 2e. 6d. a bushel?`"--" Yes; is. 4d. per day, or Bs. a week." The itness was then asked if the labourers would do more work if they had better beer and living? The answer was, "To be sure ; they cannot do more than half a day's work. Some of them dropped down when they had a little hard work." He trusted that this year they would have the vote of the Honourable Member for the West Riding, when be reminded the Honourable Gentleman of a speech of his at Manchester a year or two ago, upon which occasion he said, " We sympathise with the farmers; we we will never tolerate one shilling for protection by way of corn, but we will co-operate with them in getting rid of that obnoxious tax, the malt tax. We owe the farmers something, and we will try to repay them in kind."—(Hear, hear.) He hoped also that they should have the support of the late Sir R.Peel's friends, and of all the Welsh Members who were fond of good ale.—(A laugh.) Mr. HUME, amid genera l cries of " Divide,"; said an appeal had been made to the Free-traders by the Hon. Member for West Surrey. Now he, as a Free-trader, intended io vote for the entire repeal, in opposition to any partial repeal, and lie had made a proposition to that effect so long ago as 1829. The Right Hon. Gen tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated that the increase of the duty on malt had not affected the consumption. That was a palpable error. In 1804 the tax was raised from 2s. 2d. to 4s. 4d., and notwitlas standing the increased population the consumption of malt fell on the average of the next few years from 25,500,000 bushels to 23,000,000 bushels. He consi dered that the effect of increasing the duty on malt had been to change the moral character of our population, and to drive them from beer, which was a wholesome beverage, to spirits. This country now consumed from 23,000,000 to 24,000,000 gallons of ardent spirits an nually. Was it not, then, for the House, when they saw the amount of drunkenness, crime, and demoralize tion that existed in the land, and considered that it was produced by the fiscal regulations which they maintained, to alter the present system ? From what ever articles taxation must come, he asked them not to take it from the beverage of the middle and lower classes. The whole population of the country was in terested in this question, and he thought that the appeal to the Free-traders which had been made by the Hon. Member for West Surrey was a strong and powerful one, for he could not understand Gentlemen taking trouble to obtain cheap bread and cheap beef, and now turning round and refusing to give them cheap drink.—(Hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Ex chequer had asked hew he could meet the deficiency of 5,500,0001., which the repeal of this tax would occa sion. He would tell the Right Hon. Gentleman. Re duce the expenditure, and go back to establishments which in former years were found adequate for every purpose. Look after the Crown revenues, levy an equitable property .tax, and impose a duty of one per cent. upon the descent of landed property. If the Go vernment would direct their attention to these matters, there would be no difficulty in the way of repealing the malt-tax. Mr. BASS decidedly disagreed with the Hon. Mem ber for Wakefield as to the effect of the repeal of the malt-tax in bringing large quantities of foreign malt into the market. When he saw the principal brewers make their own malt because they could not trust others, he never believed they would go abroad for the foreign article. It was very difficult to make good malt, and in cold countries where severe frost prevailed it was impos sible. With regard to the transport of barley, the English brewers preferred English barley as the best, but in consequeuce of the failure they had lately to im port. The importation of foreign malt had decreased many years back, and had been lass in 1850 than iu the 3 ears 1848 or 1849. In reply to the Hon. Member for Wakefield's remarks on the proposition for a half-duty, a notice of which he (Ur. Bass) had on the paper for that night, he would only say that he knew of no re striction now existing which would prevent the malt from being manufactured as good as it could be. He was informed that it would not be competent for him to bring forward his motion that evening; but he would say that on some future occasion he thought he could bring forward reasons sufficient to induce the House to agree to his proposition. Neither he, nor, he believed, the Hon. Member who had brought forward the present motion, bad any idea of interfering with the fiscal ar rangements of the year.—(Cries of "Divide.") Mr. 13110 PHER 12 ON protested against the delusion that this was' a poor man's tax, or that there was any sort of analogy between a duty on wheat and a duty on barley. Bread was a necessary of life—beer nothing of the sort. The malt-tax was an entirely self-imposed tax, which the people could themselves repeal, and he certainly should not vote for the repeal of a tax which was so entirely in everybody's own hands. Mr. HENLEY did not understand how it was that with such views the Hon. Member had voted upon the sugar duties, or upon the coffee duties, which were quite as much self imposed taxes as that upon male—(lean) The Hon. Member for Montrose complained that the landed property was exempt from the probate end legacy duties. The teasoa why those duties had not been im posed upon landed property was simply because this sort of property, passing not by will but by settlement, legacy and probate duties upon it would have been a remark ably unproductive impost. The Hon. Gentleman might therefore fully console himself with the stamp duties and the tee upon leasehold property, and the land-tax, for these got much more out of landed property than ever legacy or probate duties would have extracted. The Marquis of GRANBY said, the Hon. Member for Montrose pointed to the army, the navy, and the Ordnance, for the means of making up the deficiency to be occesiened in the revenue by the repeal of the malt-tux. The Hon. Member foraot the admission of his own leader, that it was precisely the repeal of the corn-law which made us dependent on foreigners for no less than 10,000,000 quarters of wheat per annum; that rendered it impossible for the Government to reduce the exvnditure to which the Hon. Gentleman referred. Lord J. RUSSELL reminded the Hon. Member for Montrose that, no very long time after the year 1826, to which he had referred, the question was brought before the House whether the malt-tax should be red aced or the duty taken off beer, and the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Right lion. Member for Cambridge, preferred to take off the tax upon beer, which was ac cordingly taken off to the extent of 3,000,0001. per annum. At the present moment he believed the fact to b that the ateri countrybeer was not paying more duty upon the raw than it paid seventy years ago. m Various gentlemen had p ro p osed various wa y s of supply ingal of the deficiency to be occasioned by a repeal: of the malt-lax. The Honourable Member for Middlesex sug gested, amoog other things, the imposition of legacy and probate duties upon landed property; but the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire, on the other hand, showed that landed property already paid equivalent duties. As the House was not at all ready to vote for the sub stitutes proposed, the real result oi the motion would be, that there would be a diminution of 5,000,000/. in the revcnue.—(ilear, bear.) The lion. Member for Mon trose said, " You should at once take 5.000,000/. off the expenditure for the army and navy ;" and he stated, as a reason for that course, that the present Government had increased the expenditure for the army and navy by 5 000 0 , 00/. He (Lord J. Russell) entirely denied that imputation. Ile believed the estimates voted for the army and navy in the present year were not so large as in 1845. It was true there had been some increase in the Ordnance estimates, but he did not believe that, n they coubl ry would bi ould be pre then veil' it Boti3© 1 9 not give?, hose who vi t of the in' Teal for re his appell and cryliri •oposing the ated tb 9 C eraplor n the It in th e ile in th e ar thei ouse 11' 0 d he or heir oral kivg th e aption of •essed so h it w t . ° to o bt.top 'or tht' lr than the words on as is mai fv ; prospec t ;et theta this WO 6 ) purstl• ,he 3gr l " 11 of the he COw ike off SO ea flut' LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MAY 9,"1 taken altogether, there was any increase in the present year upon the estimates of 1815. He thought the louse would not be prepared to make to make the great dimi nution suggested by the Hon. Member ;or Montrose, and it aepeared to him that the main reason for voting against this motion wao that it wcrild leave the fiaancee of the c mntry in a ruinous condition—(Hear, hear) — and that they would have no source from which they could supply the loss of revenue.—(Cheers.) Mr. CAYLEY, in reply, said that his quarrel with the Noble Lord, who asked hoes the defi nc ciey of 5,000,00 a in the revenue could be supplied, 'was that since the repeal of the corn-laws they had already thrown away 5,000,0001. This tax was most unjust and intolerable in its operation, and he therefore demanded from that House, in the name of justice, its repeal. The House then divided, when there appeared For the motion m ••• ••• 122 Against it m 253 Majority against the motion ... -- 136 SCOTTISH UNIVERSITIES. Mr. COWAN moved for leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the admission to the lay or secular chairs in the Scottish universities. Mr. E. ELLICE seconded the motion. Mr. F. MAULE entirely approved of the provisions of the Bill, and would be very glad to give the Hon. Member for Edinburgh any assistance in his power in carrying it into effect. Sir R. INGLIS opposed the motion. The object of the Bill, after what had passed, was evident. It was to separate the religious community of Scotland from the professorial duties of the university; to provide that the Professor of Moral Philosophy, for instance, might be a person of any religion or of no religion. It was a ques tion into which he would not then enter, whether this would not be a violation of the Act of Union and the rights of the Church. Lord J. RUSSELL did not think the security upon which the Hon. Baronet would rely was at all effective. There was such a restriction that, if rigidly enforced, it would prevent an Episcopalian, for instance, from being a professor, and thus you might lose a most valuable and learned man.—(limar, hear.) Ho believed it had not been, in fact, very rigidly enforced, but then, if so, it was no test of value. Believing, generally speaking, that these tests were no real security at all, he should vote for the motion.—(Hear, hear.) After a few words from Mr. CEIARTERIS and Mr. FORBES, the motion was agreed to. BOARD OF CUSTOMS. Mr. MITCHELL moved that all the petitions pre sented that session complaining of the Board of Ous t sms be referred to a Select Committee on Customs. — Motion agreed to. THE PROPERTY-TAX COMMITTEE. Mr. HUME moved that a Select Committee be ap pointed to inquire into the present mode of assessing and collecting the income and property-tax, and to consider whether any other system of levying the same, so as to render the tax more equitable, can be adopted. After the long debate which had talcen place, he hoped this would be agreed to without further discussion. Mr. GLADSTONE thought this a question of the utmost importance, and one which bad not yet been de bated, and ought not to be adopted without very full con sideration. It was not included in the proposition the Hon. Member induced the House to adopt, and as he (Mr. Gladstone) understood, many who supported him in limiting the grant of the tax tcna single year did so upon other grounds entirely distinct and apart from those of the lion. Member, and by no means committing them selves to the appointment of a Committee; but, on the contrary, highly disapproving of it.—(Hear, hear.) The present was not a very convenient opportunity of discus sing such a question in the manner its gravity demanded; but he (Mr. Glad,tone) would soy that, independent of many very serious difficulties of detail and of lower ordereit uppeared to him that there was great reason to fear that the appointment of such a Committee might amount to no less than this—the appointment of a Com mittee to inquire whether we would or would not keep with with the proprietor of the public funds.—(oh, oh!) That was received as if it were something strange and preposterous; but Le was prepared to support it by rea sons.—(fiear, hear.) lie hoped the Hon. Member would not object to tako a discussion upon the question upou some more convenient occasion. He (Mr. Gledetone) should be disposed to propose that the debate be adjourned. Mr. HUME had not been aware, from what passed when the matter was mentioned before, that there was any opposition to the motion, and could not conceive that any act or word of his warranted the Right Hon. Gentleman in supposing that he was not anxious to keep faith with the public creditor.—(liear, hear.) He (lid not know that the House desired a discussion on the subject, but the Right Hon. Gentleman could make any observations when the names should be proposed. Mr. S. HERBERT apprehended that the vote come to was simply that the iecome-tax should last only for one year. There was a strong objection to the creation of a permanent income-tax as an habitual source of re• venue.—(Hear, hear.) Ile did not think the question as to the schedules, and the possibility of modification, was gone into. The misunderstanding of the Hon. Member as to the observation about keepin g faith with the public creditor proved the necessity of discussion; what was desired was to show him that, having the strongest sense of the importance of keeping faith with the public ere• ditor, ho was going to endanger it without being aware of it.—(Hear.) The notion of discussing the principle on the appointment of the names was puerile. It was not becoming in the House to come to such a vote in the dark, without having before it the reasons for and against it; and it was then close to midnight. Mr. AGLIONBY was reconciled to the vote he gave. Though he desired to make the tax more equitable, be voted against the Hon. Member (Mr. Hume) because he saw by whom the lion. Member was supported. It was plain enough they did not vote in favour of an equitable adjustment.—(Hear.) Did any man believe that there would have been a majority for the motion the other night, if the question had not been viewed as a question of the continuance of the tax for one year with the view of referring the subject to a Committee? The sole ob ject with which many Hon. Members . voted for the mo tion was that an inquiry should take place—(Hear. hear) —and he hoped, therefore, that the Right Hon. Gentle man opposite would not raise a discussion as to appoint ing a Committee. Mr. STANFORD had voted for the motion "of the Hon. Member for Montrose on Friday because he be lieved the tax as inquisitorial as it was an unpopular tax. He preferred having it for one year to having it for three years, which would have implied that it was to be a permanent tax. He repelled the imputation that those with whom he acted made the question ono of free trade or of protection. It was a question of direct or of indi rect taxation; and he did not wish the tax to be made more equitable with the view of being made permanent, for he objected to it in Coto. Colonel SIBTHORP inquired, whether it was the in tention of the Hon. Member for Montrose, by the nomi tion of this Committee, to render . the tax permanent? Mr. HUME replied that it was not for him to say whether the tax should be made permanent or not. The House had decided to continuo it for one year; he had proposed a Committee of inquiry, and it would be for the House afterwards to decide whether the tax should be continued. Mr. SLANEY thought it was manifest, from what had passed, that the motive of the majority on the motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose was as various as the individuals of whom it was composed —as various as the contents of the beautiful fabric in Hythaparke—(Divide.) It seemed proper to uppsint a Committee, - for the par pose of seeing whether the tax could be made more equi table or not. Sir T. ACLAND had voted for continuing the tax one year. He felt tho difficulty arising from the objec tions to it on the ground of inequality, which would increase with each renewal. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said what had passed to night had only confirmed the opinion he gave on Friday night, that the House was incurring very great inconve nience in agreeing to the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose, having a totally different view of the steps that were to follow me that motion. But he (Lord J. Russell) must say that his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume) had always clearly and distinctly stated the ob ject he had in view in that motion. His lion. Friend wished the tax to be limiteci for one year, tor the pur pose of having an inq uir y ; and he (Lord John Russell) must say, the House having agreed to limit the tax to one year, and his Lion. Friend having stated his object to the inuuiry, to see how far the tax could be made more equitable, ho thought the whole country would now be disappointed if that inquiry did not take place. If the House did not agree to the motion for a Com mittee, when they came next year to consider the pro priety of continuing the tax, they would be in the same position in which the y were at present. But if the pro posed inquiry took place, objections could then be stated to the operation of the tax, and plans suggested with a view to modify what might be considered tits inequali ties; at least, such inquiry would give the Home some means of deciding whether ,they would continue the tax for three yenta or one year, and with or without any ea lifieation. The Hon. Member for Bucks (Mr. Dis raeli),i although he gave his vote in favour of the limita tion of the tax to one year, thought the House could not expect that it would be done away with immedi ately; and if it were continued, that it was desirable it should be continued in a manner to show the country that all had been done that co Lord J. uld be done to render the t a x equitable.--(Hear.)--(Hear.)( Russell) certainly gave no ooiniou now whether his lion. Friend (Mr. Flume) should ask for his Committee at the present time; but whenever he did move for that Committee, be (Lord J. Russell) should certainly give hie vote in fa vourer might be tl e te th m e ot g iv h e t of the inotion.—(Heawrh)atev Mr. Dig', AEU said, for the vote the House came to on Friday, h nt oft this they were morally pledged to the appeietme Committee. He very much disapproved of transferring the duties of the Government to Committees of that House; and he had shown his, disapprobation disin io a no iv fsu o ch on a course on a previous oc casion, by calling the Salaries Committee. He thought that subsequent experience would have confirmed the House in the pro priety of the course he took on that occasion. With regard to the present Committee, the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) rather misunderstood the observation which he made the other night. He (Mr. Disraeli) was aware that the general feeling of those who voted was, that although the proposition of the Honourable Member for Montrose was merely to substitute one for three yelrs as the duration of this tax, virtually it was in favour of a Committee; and, as far as his (Mr. Mr. Disraeli's) vote was concerned, he should make no attempt to get rid of the Committee.—(hear, hear.) Sir G. CLERK said, under the terms of an Act of Parliament, every shilling cf the public debt had been borrowed, and by the course they wore about ;o pursue they would place the creditor under Schedule D in a more unfavourable position than that in which he stood at present. He thought, therefore, that was a point which ought to be especially guarded against eefore the Committee was appoitted. The CHANCELLOR of the EXQIIEQuER sa id, he did not think anybody would sunoF;e: that he was parti cularly f%voKrahle to the appointment of a Committee to inquire into this subject.—(Laughter.) had stated dietinetiv on a former occasion, that ho did rot see that much good was likely to result from a Committer. Having Fr:mised that, he could oulv say he thought the Rouse was mcrelty conamittcd to the appointment of a Consaiittee. He felt that a sacred duty ,re:.-Aed with the House to take care that they kept inviolable faith with the public creditor.—(lLar, hear,) The motion of bis lion. Friend the Member for Montrose was for a ;elect Committee to inquire into the present mode of assessing and collecting the income and property-tax, and to con sider whether any other system of levying the same, so ai tO render the Cos more equitable, could he adopt4d. There was not one word in the terms of his Hon. Friend's motion which implied the slightest breach of faith with the public creditOr.—(Hear, hear.) The motion was then agreed to without a division. On the motion of Mr. FORSTER, Mr. Tennent wes added to the Committee on Customs, in the room of Mr. Fagan, K AFIR WAR. Lord J. RUSSELL proposed the nomination of the Select Committee on the relation of the Kafir tribes with this couutry, to consist of the Secretary at War, the Marquis of Granby, Sir E. Buxton, Mr. Stanley, Colonel Thompson, Mr. Cardwell, Viscount Mandeville, Mr. Evans, Mr. Mackinnon, Mr. Carter, Sir J. Walmsley, Mr. Booker, Admiral Dundas, Colonel Estcourt, and Mr. Hawes. Colonel DUNNE complained that in the Committee which the Noble Lord proposed to nominate, not a single Irish Member had been mentioned; and that "not in that Committee alone, but in all Committees of the House, Irish Members were systematically left out.—(Hear, hear.) If Ireland was considered a part of the United Kingdom, ho thought it exceedingly unfair that its re presentatives should be constantly excluded in that way from Committees of the House.—(Hear, hear.) In other respects he thought the Committee had not been fairly se lected, and he would oppose its nomination. Lord J. RUSSELL said it was certainly not inten tional on his part that no Irish 'Gentlemen were nomi nated on this Committee. He had endeavoured to select the Committee in the fairest manner he could, and it certainly had not occurred to him that any Irish Mem ber would be desirous of being placed upon that Com mittee. If the Hon. and Gallant Member was himself willing to servo upon it, he would strike out the name o' Admiral Dundaa ' aud insert that of the Hon. and Gal lent Member for Portarlington. Mr. HOBHOUSE considered that the system of ap pointing Committees was most partial and unjust, and if no other Member brought the subject forward, he would undertake to do so. The system was carried out in order to blind the country. Gentlemen on the Treasury benches compared lists, and having agreed among them selves, they excluded some of the most intelligent and able Members of the House. He would ask whether the omission of names was a privilege or an exclusion, when such Gentlemen ae the. Members for Leominster and King's Lynn were excluded? It was an exclusion. He would take leave to say that he had been seven years a Member of that House, and was not inferior to many Members who were appointed upon Committees. It was also a means of obtaining information which would enable Members to be in a condition to serve their country. It was also a means of gaining popularity. For example, when a Committee recommended the abolition ef the office of the Master of the Mint, a Member of that Committee would go down to his constituents and say, see what I have done.—(Hear, hear.) They saw an Hon. Member serving on Committees who was connected with what was called the leading journal. Parties were put upon these Committees that they might obtain popu larity. He thought, sow that the Government had de puted the duty of the Government to Committees of that House, they ought to adopt the French system, and divide themselves into bureaus. The mode of nominating these Committees was most obje.ctionable, and it was, in his judgment, a constitutional question, which ought to be considered, and he should next session catl the attention of the House to it. Mr. REYNOLDS considered that there ought to be at least three Irish Members open the Committee. and complained of his own exclusion from two local Com mittees on former occasions. He would suggest to the Noble Lord not to press the nomination of the Com mittee that night, but to take time to consider the matter. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the Hoe. Member for Lincoln was mistaken in stating that th -, Hon. Members for Leominster and King'e Lynn had not been placed upon Committees. The Hoe. Member for Leominster had served last ses sion upon the Attorney-General's Committee on the bankruptcy laws. Mr, HO BIIOUSE explained that what ho had said was, that the omission of a Member's name from a Coin mittee could not be considered an exemption, because such rising and and able Members as the Hon. Member for King's Lynn and the Hon. Member for Leominster were placed upon Committees. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would not say a word more on that subject, as he had mis understood the Hon. Member; but with regard to Ire land, he could say, that for the last four or five weeks hardly one Committee had been appointed which had not one or two Irish Members upon it. Mr. KEOGH said that this question had been before the House last year, when it was found that of twenty one Committees Irishmen were excluded from fourteen. On the Irish Customs Committee Mr. Fagan had boon appointed, although it was known that he was about to retire, and his place was supplied by Mr. Tennent, who, owing to ill health was seldo& able to be present. Ho would oppose the Committee. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the person who had been selected was Mr. Tennent, Mem ber for one of the largest and most prosperous towns in Ireland. Mr. SADLEIR had no doubt whatever that the ex clusion of Irish Members was systematic, and he could not forget that there was not a single Irish Member on the Committee or the Commission appointed to inquire as to the best Transatlantic station. Colonel DUNNE moved the postponement of the Committee. Mr. HOBHOUSE seconded the motion. Lord JOHN RUSSELL observed that he had not the least objection to any number of Irish Gentlemen serv ing on the Committee. And as the Hon. Member for Dublin said that he thought that three would be a fair proportion, he was willing that the Committee should consist of seventeen Members, and that the name of Ad miral Dundas should be omitted. If the Hon. Member for Athlone would allow the nomination of the Com mittee to proceed now, he (Lord J. Russell) would upon Monday propose the names of three Irish Members. Mr. KEOGH would oppose the nomination until ho knew the names of the Irish Members. He protested against the Committee altogether. He would, there fore, move the adjournment of the debate. Mr. HUME appealed to the lion. Member not to persist in his opposition, after the concession of the Noble Lord. Colonel DUNNE was satisfied with the proposition of the Government, and entreated his Hon. Friend to forego his opposition. Mr. 110 &RE considered the demand of his Hon. Friend perfectly fair. He wished merely to know the names which were to be nominated. Mr. SADLEIR raw no inconvenience arising from the postponement of the question. They had not raised it for the mere purpose of a profitless discussion. Lord NAAS entreated his Hon. Friend to give way. The Noble Lord had conceded all that was demanded. Lord J. RUSSELL said that if he postponed the Committee until Monday, he had no guarantee that the Hon. Member would be more reasonable upon that day. Mr. BRIGHT was not aware that the Irish Members had suffered, or that any question had suffered by the exclusion of Irish Members—(Laughter)—because he agreed very much with the Hon. Member for Lincoln, that Committees were chosen in a very unsatisfactory manner, and that nine out of ten were nothing but a sham.—(lleur.) He was glad the question had been brought forward by the Hon. Gentleman behind him, and he hoped that in future the Irish Members would take a greater part in Committee work, and that there would be no cause to complain th at they did not attend as well as English Members. The Noble Lord having consented to add the names of three Irish Mem bers, in common fairness ho trusted the Hon. Member (Mr. Keogh) would not roar the effect of that which had Keen done by insisting that the Committee should not be appointed to-night. Mr. KEOGH could not defer to the advice of the Honourable Member fOr Manchester, and he hoped the friendly sneer directed to Irishmen would be remem bered not only by Irish Members in the House, but by Irishmen out of doors, and that might be, important to the lion. Gentleman. It was very uoplee.sant to object to the name of any Gentleman. particularly to the name of any Member front his part of the country; and, there fore, he must persevere, at the risk of incensing the Hon. Member for Manchester, in objecting to the ap pointment of a portion of the Committee until it could he appointed as a whole. Mr. BRIGHT said it was entirely a mistake if it Har, was thought he intended a sneer on Irish Merabers.—( hear.) No one had paid more attention taken more interest then he had in Irish business; outbthfaatdwoausbiae very dull place, and it wa s a common thing, cleaning,,aningcoduiladerbeentatttoacthheadt,intoteroadia a laugh and convey a m The House then divided, when there appeared — For the adjournment of the debate 11 1 e; Agaisest 115 Majority ••• appointed Marquison Colonel t Mandeville,M Thompson, Mr. Carter, Sir Joshua Committee: — r inM E gr d • weSaurdteleermeSteLlaxilrYwt-oeanrsV‘t'Mhaerrn,. Stanley, Mr. Cardwell, Viscous . Evans, Mr. cWtir, andlmtsl z,,r ey, Mr. Booker, Admiral Bandits, Colonel Est ouMr. KEOGH nave no tice that he should propose the a ddi t ion of Mr. gave notice that he should propose the addition of Mr. Sadleir, Mr. Reynolds, and C o l one l Dunne to the Committee. COMPOUND HOUSEHOLDERS BILL. This Bill was, aster a short discussion, read a third time, and passed. PROCESS AND PRACTICE (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. REYNOLDS complained that the Attorney- General for Ireland had, in violation of a promise given by the Noble Lord at the head of the Government, passed too Bill through a stage in a thin House at nearly two o'clock in the morning. Mr. FOX MAULE said the promise of the Noble Lord was only with respect to Bills to which an opposi tion was made. On that occasion there were a number of Irishmen present, not ono of whom objected to the Bill passing through Committee. Th e a mendments as proposed were then agreed to. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the :goose adjourned 4t a Qtiarier to Two o'clock. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. (From. the tes and Froceeiings of the House of Commons ) ittunsu.ir, :NAY 8. Motion made, and Ques•ion put, " That leave be given to bring in a Bill to repeal the Malt-lax." The House divided : MINORITY-AYES, 122. Adder' cy. C. B. Farnham, E. B. Newdcgate, C. N. Alcoa, Thomas. Fellowes, .E. O'Brien, Sir T. Bagge,Willi a m Floycr, John O'C onne ll, John Bag*, William Forbes, William' . • O'Fittlierty, Anthony Barron, Sir H. Frewen, IC. I. A. E. r Pm, Robertßarro . Fuller, w, W. 11. , Bass, M. T. c a uwey, Sir W. P. Plumptr M e, J. P. Bennet, Philip Galway, Viscount Porta4elville Beresford, William Gaskell, J. M. Prime, Richard Best, John Gilpin, R. T. Pugh, David Blackstone, W. S. Gooch, B. S. Rendlosham, Lord Blake, M. J. GranbAllarquis Of Renton, J. c. Blondford, Marquis Greene, John - Reynolds, John Booker, T. W. Guernsey,' Lord - Rufford, , Frartels Booth, Sir R. G. Haltord, Sir Henry Rushout, Captain Bramston, T. W. Morris, Captain Sadleir, John BrOadley - , 11. Ilencage, Edward Salivey,"Colonel Brooke, Lord Henley, J. W. Scully, Francis Buck, L. W. Higgins, George • Seymer, H. K. Burghley, Lord Ilildyard, T. B. Sibthorp, Colonel Bnrroughes, H. N. Hill, Lord E. ' Somerset, Captain Cabbell, B. B. Hornby, John Spooner, R. Child, Smith Jolliffe, Sir W. IL Stafford, Augrustus Cholmeley, Sir M. Keating, Robert Szephenson, Robert Christopher, R. Keogh, William Stuart, John Cobbold, J. C. Knightley, Sir C. Stuart; 11. Coles, 11. B. Knox,.W. S. Start, 11. G. Colvile, C. R. T.,Xwless, Cecil Sullivan, Michael • Compton, 11. C. Lennox, Lord H. G. Talbot, J. 11. Conolly, Thomas • ! Lewisham, Viscount • Trollope, Sir J. Cotton, W.ll. Long, W. Tyler, Sir G. Crawford, W. S. itraher, N. Tyrrell, Sir J. Cartels, H. M. Meagher, Thomas Vyse, It. H. R• II • De sell, John T. Marmers, Lord G. Waddington, David Disraeli, B. Manners, Lord J. Waddington, H. S. Dod, J.. W. Muth, Earl of Wakley, T. Dodd, G. Maunsell T. P. Williams, John Drummond, Henry . Mn:', 'William Willianis, W. Duncombe, A: Miltonillscount Yorke, 'E. T. Dunne, Colonel Moore, G. H. • - TELL7.II9. Du Pre, C. G. Mulllngs, J. R. Cayley, E. S. - Evelyn, William J. Mundy, William Ilume, J. MAJORITY—NOES, o sB. '' Abdy, Sir Thomas Gladstone, W. E. Paget, Lord C. •cland, Sir T. Glyn G. C. ralMer. R oun d e ll Adair, R. Shafto Graham, Sir J. Palmerston. m. Aglionby, H. A. Greene, Thomas Parker, John Anson, Colonel Grenfell, Charles W. Peel, Colonel Armstrong, R. B. Grey, Sir G. Peel, Frederick Ashley, Lord Grey, Ralph W. Perfect; Robert Bagshaw, John Grosvenor, Lord R. Peto, Samuel M. Bathes, M. T. Guest, Sir John . Pigbtt, Francis Baring, Sir F. Hall, Sir B. Pilkington. James 1 Baring, Thomas Hallyburtou, Lord Pinney, William Baring, Francis Haumer, Sir Jolla Plowden, Bell, Jacob Hardcastle, J. A. Power, Nicholas Bellew. R. M. Harris, Richard Powlett, Lord W. Berkeley, Admiral Hastie, Alexander Rawdon, Colonel Berkeley, Henry F. nestle, Archibald Reid, Colonel Berkeley, C. L. Hatchell, John Ricardo, J. L. Bernal, Ralph Hawes, Benj. : Ricardo, Osman Birch, Sir T. Hayes, Sir E. Rice, E. R. Blair, Stephen Headlam, T. E. Rich, Henry Blakemore, R. Heald, James Richards, Richard Bouverie, E. P. Heathcoat, John Hominy, Colonel Bowles, Admiral lieatheote, Sir G. J. Romilly, Sir Joke.' Boyle, Colonel Heneage, G. H. Russell, Lord John . Bright, John Henry, Alexander Russell, Edward S. Broeklehurst, J. Herbert, Sydney Russell, F. C. Brockman, E. D. Hervey, Lord A. Sanders, George Brotherton, J. Heywood, James Scrope, G. P. Brown, W. Heyworth, L. Seymour, 11. D. Bulkeley, Sir R. B. Hindley, C. Seymour, Lord Busfeild, W. Hobhonse, T. B. Shelburne,lEarl of Cardwell, Edward Hodges, T. L. Sheridan, R. B. Caulfeild, J. M. Hodges, T. TNiisden Sianey; R. A. Cavendish, C. C. Rogg, Sir J. W. Smith, Vernon Cavendish, G. U. Howard, Lord E. Smith, John Abel Cavendish, W. G Howard, C. W. G. Smith, M. T. Charteris, Francis Hatt, William Smith, John B. Childers, J. W. Inglis, Sir It. Sinollett, A. Clay, James • Jermyn, Earl '.Somers, J. I'. Clay, Sir W. Rershaw,.James Somerville, Sir W.. Clements, C. S. Labonehere, H. Spearman, 11. J. Clifford, H. M. Langston, J. H. Stanford, J. F. Cockburn, Sir A. Lawley, B. R. Stanley, W. 0. Coke, Hon. E. K. Lemon, Sir C. Stansfield, W. R. C. Colebrooke, Sir T. Lewis, Sir T. Stanton, W. 11. , Collins, William Lewis, G. C. St rickland, Sir d. Cowan, Charles Lindsay, Colonel • Stuart, Lord J. Cowper, W. F. Littleton, E. le; Talbot, C.,11. Craig, Sir W. G. Loch, James Tanered, 11. W. Crowder, R. P.. Locke, Joseph Tenison, Edward K. Currie, Raikes Lockhart, A. E. Temient, .J. Dalrymple, Captain Lowden, Pryse Thiektiesse, R. A. Davie, Sir U. Lushington, Q. Thompson. Colonel Dawson, T. V. Lygon, Gen. ThereelY, T. Denison, J. E. Mackinnon, W. A. Tollemache, F. J. D'Eyncourt, C. T. M'Gregor, John Townley. R. G. Douglas, Sir C. 7 , • M`Taggart, Sir J. Train, George Drumlaurig, Viscount Mahon, Viscount Trelawny, J. S. Drummond, Home • Mangles. R. D. Trevor, Thomas Duff, George S. • Marshall, J. G. Vatic, Lord H. Duff, James Marshall, William Verner, Sir W. Duke, Sir James Martin, C. W. Vesey, Thomas Duncan, George Matheson, Alex.. Villiers, Viscount Duncuft, John Matheson, Sir J. Villiers, Charles Dundas, Admiral . Matheson, Colonel Vivian, J. H. Dundas, Sir 1). Mauls, Fox 'lv almslcy, Sir J. Ebrington, Viscount Melgund, Viscount Walter, John Egerton, Sir P. Miles, P. W. S. Watkins, Colonel Ellice, Edward Milner, W. M. Wawn, J. T. Ellice, 1%, jun. Milnes, R. H. Welby,- G. E. Ellis, John Mitchell, T. A. Wellesley, Lord C. Elliot, John E. Moffatt, George West, F. R. Emlyn, Viscount Moody, C. A. Westhead, J. P. Enfield, Viscount Morgan, li. K. G. Willcox, Brodie Estcourt, J. B. Morris; ,David Willyams, IL Euston, Earl Mostyn, E. H. L. Williamson, Sir H. Evans, J. Mowatt, Francis Wilson, James Evans, William Mulgrave, Earl of Wilson, Matthew Ewart, William Nicholl, J. Wodehouse, E. Fergus, John Norreys, Lord Weed. Sir Charles Ferguson, Sir R. Norreys, Sir 1). Wood. Sir W. P. Foley, J. H. Fordyce, A. D. Wyval; Marmadiike Forster, Matthew OCl O 'g rd 'oe , n, : S r e i ll il C ia .3 m l. 3. . N‘Y'oriughngt,s°:JWoh. B. Forteseue, J. W. Fox, W. J. Gibson, T.M. Owen, Sir John Packe, C. W. Paget, Lord A. um. Ilayter, W. U. Hill, Lord M. THE GREAT EXHIBITION. Yesterday the influx of visitors to the Exhibition was greater than ever, and the sum taken at the doors could not have been much short of 2,0001. This is of course entirely the proceeds of the ss. entrance fee, and does not include the large amount still accruing from the sale of season tickets. All connected with the undertaking are very naturally overjoyed at the success in a financial point of view which thils attends it, and which is mani fested more and more decisively every day. The im provement in the weather has acted with magical effect upon the flow of visitors, and brought out the beauty and fashion of London into Hyde-park just as sunshine developes butterflies. They take possession of the Crys tal Palace in a manner which mast make the Royal Commission have sundry misgivings about their power to keep it in their own hands now, or to have it removed a few months hence: A man may be coerced, but how are ladies to be dealt with should they take it into their heads to keep the building as a promenade, for which it really seems to be well adapted, when the exigencies of our variable climate are remembered? Other cities, under more genial skies, have their places of fashionable resort, where friends meet and chat and part without the bother of a formal call. Here, unhappily, the wea ther destroys one-half of our opportunities to learn cheerfulness, and our stiffaess of character does the rest. One would think, from present appearances, that the Crystal Palace is likely to be seized upon by the public as supplying a great want in this respect. Of course, at ,present, and while thronged with thousands of specta tors, it is not a place of rendezvous. Friends may be there and on the look-out for each other for hours to gether without meeting. In fact, this is generally the case, but as the first excitement wears off simple arrangements might be made for obviating incon veniences of this kind arising out of the size of the building. One particular central spot might be se lected where messages might be left that you had stepped into Tanis or China, or gone to Egypt or Italy, or started on a trip to America. Every one might be thus forthcoming to his friends at once, or if he wished to avoid them, as is sometimes unfor tunately the case, the Crystal Palace with its endless courts and avenues, with it secluded nooks for raw pro duce and paper-hangings, is just the place for that pur pose. Even now, when from 20,000 to 30,000 of the most inqusitivo and adventurous people ou the face of the earth and busily engaged in rummaging its multifa rious contents, it is quite possible to creep away into so litudes uninvaded by the bustling Babel elsewhere. Such is the size of the building, no part of which is overcrowded, while some still remain unvisited. Everybody when ho enters it has an intense ' desire to walk from end to end, to examine first one compartment and then another, and to text his a bsorb- . ing powers in the way of b ight - seeing or eye day Meier the in fl uence of stron'g curiosity feats o f pe des trianism are performed, the results of whicar r i ous ly ma nifested as:the hour for closing approache cu es. I t edies are then seen anxiously eastingiAmout ler .ats in the already overciowded benches with which the nave and tratisept An army of eet hansted finery' reposes u nder the grateful shuda of elms and palm trees singularly blended iet, the name scene. There they rest themselves after the fatigues of their progress throug h the industries of nations and eon tinents, reluctant to quit a spectacle where their admi ration has been so strongly aroused, and quietly watch ing the play of the great crystal fountain before them, the stream of gay company passing to and fro, the rarie gated effects of light shot through the Offering canopy overhead, and all the endless colours atui forms of a perspective into which art' has gathered her choicest trophies. What ifOthis vast collection was destroyed by fire') ,M an y cities might he burnt to the ground without causing such a sensation as that would. Ye*'. to that risk the Crystal Palace was for a moment exp ose d yes terday morning. 'The fine t:ttached to a me slo g s i none of the offices of the contractors became heated, and hi rested neon ignited a piece of ',wood with bunting ;chick or touched it. 'A piece of the burn ing c l oth into a small open cask or Indian corn, which stood, as the Irish say "convenient." All part mischief,fs was ' brew _ Leg in secret in tiwsouthern ar col lection on thil,faSt:Side. tho colonial The drapery of the counter concealed what hid ,happened, and it was only when the smoke begein 'to break forth that an alarm was raised. Fortunately such casualties have been foreseen and amply provided,for, within th Th ere are no less than a dozen large fire- engines e building, besides an timid e supply of water easily o btainable, and a thorotighlt,ll.. ganized force ready to act at a moment's notice.. -.1.; fire of yesterday was extinguished before it had tone no do more than slighdy char one lank ef wood. an d it anxiety need be caused by an occ u rrence so trifling'. _ will, however, we trust, warn all parties ccinnected with I the building to been the alert, and to trust nothing to chance. The Executive Committee continue to receive all kinds of applications from the country.with ref to the terms of admission whe n the l hoar w prices commence. men t h e ir parishioners in e written to them Among others several clergymen offiering to bring up with th em a body. Fox and Henderson arc contemplating a grand entertain ment of roast beef and plum pudding to be given by their foremen and chief workmen to the work men from foreign countries in the building. A general desire seems felt , that evcry facility should be given to the industrial classes to see and (Thirty t h e unig a s . cent spectac le which their labour h as created. Even the contractors,. for the catalogue contemplate al lowing their bands a brief pause to examine the marvels of this nineteenth century, which arc chronicled to fu ture ages by their toil. At present they are selling a b ou t 10,000 copies of the small catalogue per day—an enorm ous number when the bulk of vpl ' the re membered. As yet only one . amo is portion of the larger work has appeared, and both from unaividable. causes have many deficiencies. It is therefore necessary, and, when the importance of a correct register it . considered, e x . tremely desirable, that exhibitors whose„ contributions are not properly entered should take steps to have th e necessary emendations made. In this way perfect ae curecy,can ;Acme be attained, and . the catalogue of the Great Exhibition rendered what it ought to be—a per manent and authoritative book of reference to ',all who May interest themselves in the industtial progress °Elbe World up to the year 1851. With reference to the coun tries overtaken in their Preparations - by,lbei - opening and compellei now to confusion and labour ,while others are exhibiting their contributions,: .:: France is therniost conspicuous:instance of that tardiness. - : The Turk' . . is - proverbially slow, the 11011'14in; is ,frozen up in the Baltic, the East ':lndia . CompanY have half the world to - cross, 'and the 'Cape "of ;Good . !Hope to doable before they can bring the produce of their rest empire to swell the Wonders 01 the crystal Palace, but the French have only a small gut separating thskshore from ours'; and we are told by one of their fltv.ourite writers, that their motto is." tunjours pits." F ranca waited ill the lastinedient; - but she has not gonenkead. Jtilett .Ja n i e found nobody among hiskTbountrymon anXi : °us 'On the'evwef thb''Exhibition, so certain 'Sins it that they w ou ld b e ready nextdah, , A week has now Pined t sacs the o p en i ng, 'pit Eianeo is still far behindhand, and had muny7uayaluoro of preparation -before her: 'la our own dithiewbr the building a few :thi tlks "aie . : l '44o 3 g into idiots l'oA unoccupied, or`which at the' o list .moment it was 'found .imPosSible to complete in time. --Among these was broughtiin stud-plat:4d it theUiiiiYesti*day a bcautifnl model , c*ectited b y M r . D e ighton, of Great College-street,Westtninater, of the inter i or of- her. Ma jetty's Theatre. , The r declaration s are all carefully -re y prese ntnd i andto the multit u d es .who throng the centre of r t a h t e e k'randsptallearsianlar idea this, wo r k Iv i ll .- con i er a•ver SC" of the extremay-light and - els • gent, yet rich 5t:j . 1 . _ „... _ L _ ,...._ ,Y!h.ic4, !` firr - 31* .sty t e , is fitted up. -r--- ;: ---- 7 3---- rw ATT Ton' TU . I),ECK 01 TB" , -- ''-''-' '..v AraI:BOUND." (From Efts , Cocge a -thi.64a.ty, , How seldmn we clieetn of the 114 4,, !l I V grit ve, Fir 'down lkv the cbrisl itranul and „. „, . . ~ . . ' How little we think, of, tho i winds Wane, ~,„ •, ' . ~ , , . The hue h urricane goes, , i -And little the heed" we take. - ~, 'Mien all w e e xotea elar an e d en h ia e l4 Th A ou n g d li th th e treee ivali s of. y ll r tempthaopmasesttehaedsha o. b . 10 *0 ; • „ '• ' Bat the horth-east gale tells a diff e rent tale, . With a Voice of fearful sound, ~ —•'' - '• ~.' When a loved one is under a close-reefed s11;'. '. On the dock or in 4.- -outwar&liotind." .. _ . i_sit ow ts.4t w eie st , f iv a a l r.e ly gaet t te hi iv n npg w o e l l o oo od k s on o the nit; and the last faint light . Is' dying ekkay ia . the sky. i. ~ ~,,,',. How we'listen and gaze with a silent lip, And judge by the bending tree, flow the same wild gust must toss the Alp,, And arouse the mighty sea. Ah, sadly then do we meet the day When the signs of stor m are found, A n d pray for the loved one far away, On the deck of an " outward-bound!" There iS'orte that I 'Cherie lied whey hard' — in — . hau t — .I ' - '1 ,• We roved o'er lowland and lea ;.‘', ~ .., ~ • And Ithoughtlmy love for that one dilf the Taitid ' ' • , Was as earnest: l as love could be.'''' •E ..(th ~,..,1 , : „ But now that one has gone Out 94 thetide, I, find that I worship the more; - And. I think of the waters deep and wide, . , ~ ,• As I bask on the flowers on shore. - - ilieve watched the wind, I have 'watched theaters. And shrunk from the tempest sound; , , I • f 06iy heirt-stritige arewresth'd with the slender" spats Thatcamthe‘ outward-benad." • I hivesle pt when the zephyr forgot to creep, And the sky was without a frown, But I started soon from that fretful sleep, With the dream of a ship going down. _4 2 - rl, I have liariWthe field when the corn•Wisli ii9c•K ' And the reaper's hook was bright, . • ...:.; .-, ' , nit, my faney conjured the b rea k er antrocx, In the neadot, a moonless night. • I . . Oh ,I never will measure. atlifetion io ag n akn, • . While treading oarth's flowery nu But, wait till the loved one is far on the main, _ "". . - On - the deCICOf an " outward-bound." ~51:~%r'.. 1 ... Inn: a II eo,,ra ,tyzr .~ s I'43IZA COOK. - .COURT CIKUULAR. Immediat , ly after the -state supper at .13nekinalsaa Palace, cn night, a ,liigh4trld 'Ree Was pia . ) ell by `Afr. Araekay, Ger Maje3il ,7 6--piper,--atid—ivtis danced by the following ladies and gentlemen: — The Earl of Gifford and Lady Rachel Ruisell. Lard James P. Ilurray aild Miss Fergtvert. • _ _ Sir .fikrnes at. .iat:kenzie and Lady Alice Douglas. Sir Michael Shaw Stewart and Miss Stewart. Cluny Mai Thereon and:Lady Anne.Matalcenzie. Munro ut , Norar and Lady Elizabeth Dinieau: -Mr. J. Y. Cimphell of Isfriy and thclicti..L'ucy Karr. After.Ahe ordinary reel; tha reel' of Tulloch , was danced, in which the same ladies and gentlemen joined. La , Al performed the following dances in 'Vie balkDern_.aluriug • 'the 'night: Quadralles—L'Enfact Prodigue, The Great Exhibition, and the St. Leger. Valses—La Mandolins, Rose de Mai, and Valse d'Amour. Polkas—The Crystal .Fountain, and Polka des Poig nerds. Galops—The Review, and the Amazon and Tiger. The principal cornet was performed by Herr Kceaig, and the principal tl4gcolet __by Monsieur The Queen returned into the - ball-room after supper. and dancing was kept up until two o'clock in the morn log, . When .her-Majesty and Royal Highness- Prince Albert retired, accompanied by their illustrious visitors the Prince and Princess of' Prussia and Prince Frederick William. His Royal Highness. Prince .Henry of the Nrotherlands left at the same time. The ball then con cluded, and the numerous company einitted the Palace. Their Royal Highnesses the Duchess of Gloucester; the .Duchess of Cambridge, and the Princess Mary, visited the Queen yesterday. Their Royal slighneesaga_akti *Wife - db .- 01 7 Royal Highness the Princess of Prussia, a; Buckingham Palace. His Royal Highness Prince Albert, attended by Lieut.-Colonel F. H. Seymour, rode. out. on horseback yesterday morning. Tbeir Royal Highnesses the Prince and Princess of Prussia, with the Princess Louisa, attended by the Countess A. de Hicks, the Countess .Oriolla, Count Piikler, and Major von Bayen, visited and inspected yes terday morning the Diorama of the Overland Route so India. The Prince of Wales and Prince Alfred, attended by Mr. Birch, took a drive in au open carriage yesterday. The Princess' Royal, and the Princesses Alice and items, took an airing yesterday in an open carriage and four. HO'Majesty. and his Royal Highn ess P r i nc e WOO., with their Royal Highne sses th e P r i nce an d Palmas Prussia, took a drivo in an open landau . and . festt t„ A ef. terday afternoon. Colonel the Hon. Charles .Cfroi...'"""' Lieutenant-Colonel F. IL SeymoUr atiandisd 4l2 back. tpuaking- The Queen had a dinner party jester.(4l_ ham Palace.' 'The coniPany included her sea the miss the Duchess of their R o yal..thS edericu Prince and Priucess of Prussia .' aud aa of Bacclench, William of PrussiaLth.o fluke and lla mada•rohMariecnheisosnessor t o h t e W Th e i s k t e m o in f s ti er e , wc t a h s o tle , M Howard, and Countess A..de ftil ,,:ft,} , !".. iiek t i b c o rr, Oe m ro a rtcs o_r a? o : rtu p a c uß t t li.. s t_h on e theeriMasremunisd a Bresdalbane. Lady Hacks, Etiri vf the cs C o o i e : u O D be , Lilo Guards attended and Liu% "en ' Duchessonel F 9d . of Rent went so Count G T o h l t o x ti C 4 o d l 4-Eralgo.hruni7gs, andvisited hpr Royal Highness during dieher , . K ew yesterdaY 0 : 1 ):;: ai iif Cambridge, returning to ClaeenUe Hous e , st. :l at aes'a, in the afternoon. Her p a ys! Higline t , s h i e tte a D ch a e e s h s c o s t s i o i f eu fa: " n icestAr visited ber A . " I tati l je l l i4 C h o l u l ' e ri s c 4 ilwas held yesterday alte'earnterday:. ' lathe F o reign-office. It was attended by Lord John; %melt, the, Lqn_l ,Chalicellbr,thaM4r44u of Lansdowne,, lown the 'srl ot'Minto; Sir George Grey, Viscount .1)(a 0 Iril .• 1 , part Grey, the Chancellor of the Ext.thrquer, Sir Francis Be ring, Broughten, the E;rl of Carlisle, the Right ',lon. 'Henry Labouchere and th e Ri g h t Hon. , Fox4isale• The Conner; 3 ) 91 d 1 11 1 171 . 1 1 : 1 : ) 11: 1 : 1 1 r t . (1 of the Juries of the Revd at C the °lllini ll. i° h t i l bi t t ° i t o s Pr the I~hil,ition of 1851, met. Yellt4lrasY Class I.—Sit Henry De la MTh°, 'C.B., Cln .s 2 .--;Monsieur A. Dumas. ' 4.-I_'roleavir O,v n , F.R.S. Class !".. Jr:rxey. • 7.--Mt. I. , Ch " 8 . - 4 Aron Claarles Dustinat--e_ _ _ • CI4SS so —Sir David firew - ster, F.R.P- ClAss 10 A.—Sir 11. Ilhhep. : ,• ' Cass 11.—Sir J tines Anderson. re i utur “Arrmania, Class Senath4ult,, -, Class 13 —sir. G. T. Kemp. . Class 14.—Count Von flarrire o t• ~, Class • It3:—Hon. Colonel A IM ., ° , Class 17,—Monsieur11f - V:sti c t e l r• Y e . Y e? * Class I'B7—.HePO IZT elle) , . . , B . Fe i k i n loga . Class traarnetae. .7 Class 2 t.-7444Pic . Ip ro ce Gredy. ,‘, Cias.s Alauleae rnxtxr Duke of Argyll. • . 6. - ' .Professor 4.2s4' ;" -r-iil Roesnor, far Chevalier doifidrg. class 27• - -General au ey, for Siemer' Cla ss / --Ge 111 1 JeCcmllasdieni:AlB9T—fii3Sn'nOt:neti:;:itillSagr74'for.'l3enc*l" ass 3o.— fai ll r, e L rr ie lr utenant. Colonel Lloyd, mint Ward, attend e d. Mr. Law and a d e p utat i o n h a d an i nterv i e w with Lord Seymour yesterday-, at the °face of her Majesty--s. Com roludollerh of Woods and Forests. ate- . MX*, A numerous d e p u t a ti on , i nc luding Mr.ll:ldH•a; and 'air. Frevren, M.P., headed by t h e Duke of Rich- Enond, had an interview yesterday with Lord John Rus sell, at his official residence in Downing-street, on the subject of the Hop Duties. The Attorney-General had an interview yesterday with Lord John Russell. The Finance Committee of the Royal Commission for the Exhibition of ISSI met yesterday, at the Exhibitiall Building iu Hyde-park. Present :—Earl Gronvirts: (Cbairmau), Lord Overatone, Right Hon. H. _ , Sir Alexander b'earnaan, ate Cubits. bier. M.P., M.P., M.r. T. F. (Abseil, Mr. PetO, M.P., 04 6 _ ‘',7 • Z e t : Reid (Chnirman of the ExecutivtuComta voeo Be:wing (Seeretary) was in attendance. Mr. Data were. present. „:, She Colonial fl2. , t3ole t! aud . Dispatches were' received yesterday' a dial 1 d t In an s ! office from the Governor of the,WeS imu y :O`Ytl, „ The Sussex Oak, John Priest master,. 'arrived at . Portmotit ,l l vWa.v with tighteen htmdroclL -quarters of mackerel, which were sold at 18s. per hunditql`..,..