The Sun. — London, England, 1850-07-06 00:00:00

1847... ... 31,200,000 bushels. 1848... ... 30,200,000 „ 1849... ... 33,160,000 This increase, 0 , , was in the face of a steady and gra dual increase in the importation of foreign grain. The answer was, therefore obvious, that the importation of foreign corn did not influence injuriously th 4 consump tion of malt. The Hon. Gentleman had attributed the decreased consumption of beer to the malt duty, as well as the increased consumption of other liquids. This, however, was in his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) opinion produced by other causes—among them the great change that had taken place in the habits of the people of this country. Every Hon. Gentleman was aware of the great diminution that toLk place in his own family in the consumption of malt liquors, and of the in crease in the consumption of tea, toff e, and cocoa. The 8 10ae proposition held good as regarded the great bulk of the working classes of the country; aid in his opi nion the change was a salutary one, lißferring to the tables furnished in the report of the Lords' Committee, he found, taking the consumption of 1839, and cAnpar „int'', it with that of last year—a period of ten years—a "nit g-off of about 1.000,000 bushels of malt annually. The consumption was in 1839... ... 39 930 , 000 bushels. 1849... 38,935,000 „ Bat the consumption of tea, coffee, and cocoa in that period had increased enormously, viz.— Tea from ... 35 000,000 to 50,000 0001bs. Coffee ... 26,000,000 34,000,000 Cocoa ... 1,600 000 3,200,000 The consumption of spirits had also fallen off in about the same proportion within these last 10 years—namely, about 1,000,000 gallons annually. So likewis3 with the c onsumption of %hies, which was in 1839 ... ... 7,000,000 gallons. 1849 ... 6,240,000 o The result of this comparison was, that the consumption of all intoxicating liquors had fallen off within the last 10 yea rs , w hil e t h e consumpt i on o f a ll li quors which This he not intoxicating h a d c o n s iderably increased. he loiked upon as anything but an unsatisfactory result, becaus e in his opinion, it contributed to the advantage of the working classes. It was a convincing proof that this decrease was not owing to the height of the duty on them—especially upon malt liquors—in compari son with the cost of the article, for the duty on malt a pproached in nothing to that levied upon tea or Upon coffee, the articles that most entered into competition with it for consumption. The Honourable Gentleman argued that if the duty was taken off malt the consumption of beer would be increased to an unli mited extent, and he referred, in proof of his proposition, to the increased consumption of tea, coffee, and other articles upon which a similar reduction had taken place. Ile (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not deny that the reduction in the case of these articles had increased their consumption; but he insisted also that it was owing likewise, as he said before, to the changed habits of the e r e° Ple• A much better criterion, however, of the pro vosition as to the increase in the consumption of beer, through a reduction in the duty on malt, existed in the returns of 30 to 35 years since, when the war duty upon Malt was reduced as well as the beer duty. It as stated before the Lords' Committee that, taking the war t ax duty and the beer duty together at that period, the 'Mc amounted to about 755. 2d. per quarter upon malted corn for the stronger beer, and about 60s. per quarter for the weaker. The existing duty on malt was 20s. BJ. per o ( Planer. B u t th oug h a re d uct i on o f d u ty t o t h e extent f nearly 60s, per quarter in the one of these instances, It L id 40s, p er quarter i n th e o th er , h a d ta k en p l ace s i nce !rot the consumption of beer had not increased. If rat were the fact, what effect could the further reiuc sloe of 20s. Bd. proposed by the Hon. Gentleman be sup- Posed to have in the way of increasing the consumption of b eer? The evidence of Mr. Barclay, the eminent "rewer, taken by;the Lords' Committee, was, howeverecon elusive on this point. He admitted that the total repeal of the malt tax would make a slight increase in the con antription but instead of benefiting the consumer to the a 2 ttent of 500 p ercent ., as t h e H on . Gentleman stated, he k l aid that th e utmost re d uct i on i n the pr i ce o f b eer wou l d " a from •p r quart, which it was at present, to 3d., er , °ll ° halfpenny. But a e experiment of taking off the t h ey on malt and putting it on ag a in had be e n t r i e d, an d °se were the results:—ln 1816 the duty was 4s. 6d. r Pe bushel, a n d t h e average annua l consumpt i on i n t h ree Years was 25,000,000 bushels. In 1817 the duty was re duced t o 2.2. 6d. per bushel, and the average fell to 22,000,000 of bushels consumption • while in 1819, when e duty was again raised to 3s. Id. per bushel, the con sumption rose to 25,000,000 of bushels. This showed T that a diminished consumption followed a reduced he -- at least, in the instance quoted.—(Hear.) teatHonourable Gentleman seemed to think eat it was monstrous the duty should be paid by the roducer; but the Committee of the other House of Par bimaillqut, appointed t. inquire into the burdens on real Property, had come to the conclusion that the duty fell f, general tax o n th e consumers of the article. If th e ~"rnaers and l a b ourers were b ene fit e d, th e cons umers r ul d therefore b e equa lly b ene fit e d by other reduc- C t l4 but th en came the quest i on w h et h er t hi s s h ou ld di he articl e . O n th at h ea d L or d S tan l ey sa id th a t h e W ' t liot believe the reduction on this particular tax de old be the best mode of applying relief. The evi eee of Mr. Barclay was to the effect, that no great eo e nt would be produced in the way of benefit to the eenanmer by the total repeal of the malt duty, while a loll; would accrue to the revenue. The Hon. rntleman had quoted the opinion of M r . El man as re ded t h e benefit derivable from a reduction of the malt t; but th at gentleman had, at a mewing in Sussex on t i' l l ; 'subject of agricultural distress, moved a resolution to per elleet, that, it foreign barley was allowed to enter at I s. othequerer, the benefit which the British farmer would e so „l,wise receive from the repeal of the malt-tax go entir e ly t o t h e f ore i gn grower . Th e H on . u mber for North Lincolnshire, however, stated in the duce a i e Of the d e b ate that that the ma l t - tax sbou d b e re andt lc, as a protection against the foreign grower, (I,that a duty should be placed on foreign barley. He Chanceller of the Exchequer) hat shown that no au: benefit could arise to the producer or to the con greater from ti .e repeal of the malt-tax. If, however, no .se be fit arose from it, and if its aiventsges would *4l le ast only panial equ:vocal, was it right to alors2 e , e l , 4r ge a revenue an d s ,000,0001. per annum, and to th' "i•h it, whatever the Hon. Gentleman might say bloth e contrary, the public faith, and the national (sta ll, e meets? The Hun. Gentleman knew that it was not 0n e : 1 . 837 , 4) impose a new tax, or even to retain the old se ou - i ' d "ow. then, would he provide fur results which ci eoe e ndanger the credit of the country and the effi wo_ ,T.f its institutions ? By taking off the tax they Viol e t ': incur Theegat risk without any corresponding ad ieu' ge- benefit would be but slight and partial, el under these circumstances he thought he might seating call upon the House to concur with him in re leid. g the motion of the Hon. Member for the North Riding. fir, Dive effe ct f MMOND said when they remembered the te _ the first enactment of the excise-laws, and that pureoYdzroluced a convulsion scarcely less violent than that that th ed by the ship money—when they remembered FueY were constantly and repeatedly denounced by x and Mr. Grey in that House during the whole contm eao they she of of their operation—he was surprised that henould have heard so great a panegyric from the theirje gtllo c- Gentleman the Chancellor of tbe Exchequer merit favour, According to him they contained every of e • bare a fiscal regulation—facility of collection, pres treethirm nobody, an immense mass of moneyewith little blessed --in short, there was not a single advantage these ae it excise-laws did not possess.—(A. laugh.), He felt rZttinntsch the impropriety of interfering with the arrange tido the Government that he should not venture to the th part h 3 was a b ou t t o d o w i t h ou t, a t cell o same e time, offering a pled g e t o th e Ch ar ,- _n other of the Exchequer to g i ve hi m hi s su pp ort f or oher tax he pleas e d to l ay or .—(L aug h ter. ) she like to see him muster courage enough to e _ ( r a a tax o n t h e M anchester manufacturers Gentle the h r, hear, an d l aughter.) Oh, no, the Right Hon. he man was obli ge d to pay attention to the shakes of those ad he saw th ere , b ut h e could afford to despise of the agricultural body—(Hear, hear)—to whom the question was a matter of quite as much importance 411 estio he n repeal o f the corn-laws.—(Hear, h ear .) Th e qu With Was was, he beli eve d, t h e rea l test of the honesty u wh t ich the rep ea l o f t h e corn-laws was carried. ale it rel on account of th e l a b our i ng c l asses?— t ::, hear. y ) Was it inde e d i n or d er to give cheap food to people, or was it solely to get rid of so much cot ton manufactures? —(Loud cries of "Hear, hear.") The resent question would bring them to the test. It had been thrown out too much as if the question was some way or another connected with the landed interest. When they spoke of th e manufacturing interest, there was the merchant who s a t n h d e raw material, the manufacturer who convertePdPitt thes t e heoperative whom he employed. The interests of not, however, altogether identical. it three parties were ..sa w r. tt the interest of the merchant to sell his cotton it was theanindtei rest of tie manufacturer to buy s't eras the interest of the operative to . get his wagpes; whollyh as he could, and all these three interests were different. So it was with land.—(Hear, hear.) If t h, Government refused that boon because they conceived that it w ou ld b e a b oon t o the land e d i nterest, they W ould be e xcee di ng l y m i sta k e n. Therefore, it was, th at certain persens, finding no good in it to the landed inte rest, saw no good in a repeal of the tax. He did not ad vocate it on any such ground—he would say that it was of essential importance to all the labouring classes, and uu their account alone he advocated it. Under the pre. slut circumstan ces t h e on l y goo d t h e y co uld confer on „ people w as to cheapen their food, so as to enable L a ir to live as well upon ss. a week as they formerly ben upon 10s. In no other way could they do good, or an fit the farmer. No diminution of that tax would do Weld; nor no good would there be in taking the tax tlae beer For the benefit of both farmer and labourer, 4e. Y lhould b e encouraged to take the labourers into housesi.,..._o, and f ee d t h em there. In that case the most . ant articl e o f consumntion would be good whole epme beer. H e d oubted if the House knewwhat it was. The gut Ho n G entleman said ther e was a great a l terat i on i n taste, !and instanced the case of his own servants; but Pert of they were wise not to take beer. In the re- P er t of he - the e evidence given before the House of Lords, tha-taFeount.the owners of beer -houses gave of beer was, is t heY did2aot mix it up as it was done by the trade general. trash. Another beer from the beer-shops was inferior and deleterious r said it was generally a muddy, inferior, meat to the s article, and could not afford any nourish brewes worleing of beer-man. Another witness said the re, w h o shops were in the hands of particular said the other tepplied them with the worst article; an- A. nother-eth e - e ar was very bad but very intoxicating. b er er sold in beer-houses was very indiffe. _as m ac irtn said, the beer sold in beer-houses That witnessworse than that sold in public-houses. said, if eq._ th e No r a publican.—(A. laugh.) Another and cheese Public could buy beer as they bought bread the quality. Tj a e Y would have it of a much better at w as f the intern:le rid • ddl Yilist he eanted—be wished to get litnitawers a reason fo ing °f the excise. Were not these 14,4 42. ~e r the dislike of the servants of the °UN :Ilan to beer? Cald they nicader when they heard a brewer's account of the way in which beer was made? Why, one of the wituesses said that it was not beer the people were drinking at all; and that was fully evident from tt e following list of ingredients: It contained copperas and allum, c.ipsicum, Spanish liquo rice, coculous indicus, commonly called occulus, India berries, salt of tartar, ginger lime, linseed, and cinnamon. —(Great laughter.) A friend of his took much trouble and we t to consideruble expense in obtainining the proper tests for vegetable solutions. He procured some beer, arid evaporated it to a residuum, but not wishing to taste it, Le gave it to a cat—how the cat liked it he (Mr. Drummond) could not tell, but in a few minutes it was dead.—(Great laughter.) He kn w a town, not far from the place where he stoc,d (he did not mean his own town). in which several persons obtained grains from the brewers to feed their pigs ; all the pigs died, and that was all he would say. How could it be surprising, under these circumstances, if people altered their taste for beer ? If they chose to buy the blacking that was sold for beer, they must take the consequences ; and unless they gave the labourer a facility for making his own beer he did nothing. He hsd at home an Eng.. lish edition or the " Georgics," in which he found the following passage : " Be , r veniente die, beer dccidente canebo"— —(Cheers and laughter.) Mr. BASS said the Hon. Grntl. man appeared to be acquaint, d with a great many things that no hie xer in the ti ale was conversant w ith. If he stood there merely as tt.e organ of the public brewers, he would feel it his duty :o support the tax upon malt—nay, if there was a question whether it should be removed or doubled, he was persuad' d tbat their interest would be to invite the Howe to double it. Ho sh , )uld be the last man to impair the credit or tamper with the resources of the country, and although he had always been the advocate of proper reductions, he did not wish them to be carried to such an extant as to endanger the detentes of the country. There were many grounds on which he thought the tax on malt ought to be abolished, for al though he was a free trader he sympathised strongly with the condition of the agricultural classes, and he was compelled to state that he believed them to be at the present moment in a state of con siderable difficulty and depression, and that it was the duty of the House to alleviate these difficulties and endeavour to restore that class to a state of prosperity. It was his opinion that if they took off the malt-tax there would be certain and endur ing advantage to the agricultural interest. He had seen calculations which went to show that the absolute duty upon malt to be paid by the farmers of this country amounted to something like 6 per cent. on the rental. The abolition f the tax would therefore be a relief to that class if it went no further. But he maintained that there must be a great increase in the consumption of barley if this tax were abolished. The Right Hon. Gen tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had argued in reference to cat.es i❑ which there had been only a dimi nution of the duty. He granted, then, that in many of the cases in which there had been such diminution of duty, that act had nct been followed by such an increase in the consumption as they might have anticipated. If, however, they tried the experiment of total abolition, he was persuaded that it would be followed by an enormous increase in the consumption of barley. The result of this increase in the consumption would be an increase in the price of barley, which was not confined to one description of land, but might be produced upon any land in the c , untry if prop rly cultivated. That in crease in the price, he thought, would amount to about 4s. a quarter. He was also of opinion that the least re duction that would take place in the price of beer to the consumer would be about 25 or 30 per cent. The capi tals employed in the brewing trade were greater than in any other business in the world. The returns of one of the brewers in this town were a great deal larger than the returns of sale of any manufacturer of any other description of produce in the world. If this tax were abolished, a competition would be created of a totally different kind than what now existed, and he was sure that reductions would take place to the amount of 33 or 35 per cent. Ile believed that it was the duty of this House to give the labourers of this country a greater access to their favourite beverage than they had hereto fore enjoyed. If the consumption of beer were not impeded by these enormous duties, he did not think that the people would have such re course to that slip-lop beverage of tea—(Laughter) —that could do them no good.—(Hear, hear.) There was an article, for instance, in respect to which the duty had been wholly abclished—namely, salt. The annual consumption of it previously had been 2,000,000 of bushels; but tf e very next year the consumption in creased to 7,500,000, and the latest returns showed that the increase had arrived at 13,500 bushels.—(Hear, hear.) Similar results might be anticipated from the abolition of this tax, and he considered it was the duty of the House to make the trial. Should, however, the House not be willing to abolish it altogether, he did not think that they could find any excuse for refusing t r reduce it by one-half. Looking at the great reduc tion that had taken place recently in the price of barley, he was persuaded that the great brewers of this country would feel it to be their duty to concur in such reduction, though they might not eansent to its entire abolition. He had some reason to think that such was the feeling of the trade, although he did not mean to represent himself as their organ.—(Hear.) And upon some future °cession, if this proposition be not agreed to, he would take an opportunity of bringing forward a distinct proposition that the amount of the duty upon malt be reduced by one•half. We have been taught by the experience of that great statesman whose recent loss we all of us so much deplore, that the reduc tion of duty was not necessarily a loss of revenue.— (Hear, hear.) In many instaeces, instead of such re ductions entailing a loss upon the revenue, they actually resulted in an increase. Fee example, the duty on brandy was reduced from 225. 83., some three years ago, to 15s. In the following year there was I ery little dif ference in the revenue, and in the last year the reveLue derived from brandy at the reduced duty was greater by 20 per c, n'. than a e received from it when it was 225. 84. He hoped that the House would excuse him for oc cupying so moth of their time. Mr. M. GIBSON said there was much force in many of the observations of his Hon. Friend as to the mis chirvous effects produced by an excise duty like the malt-tax upon the manufacture of malt, and also as to its effects upon society generally in giving this dangerous monopoly to large capitalists. But the question for our consideration at this momet,t was, whether we could conscientiously bring ourselves to the opinion that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, after the House had de cided upon the expenditure of the country, could afford to remit an amount of revenue something like 5 000,0001. a year? His lion. Friend the Member for the West Riding of Yorkshire had never proposed, irrespective of the reduction of the expenditure, and irrespective of other considerations, that there should be an unconditional repeal cf the malt-tax. No; but he pro posed to pave the way for the repeal of the malt-tax, as well as other taxes that pressed upon the industry of the country, by the only practical mode it could be effected, namely, by a large reduction of the expenditure.—(liear, hear.) But as the House had determined to maintain these large war establishments, he found he would be in a great difficulty if he supported the motion of the Hon. Member for the North Riding of Yorkshire. He wanted to reduce the expenditure of the country so as to relieve the agricultural and manufacturing interests of many of the se excise duties that now pressed upon them. He had presented himself recently there as a tax repealer, though on a more moderate scale than the lion. Member for the North Riding of Yorkshire proposed. He thought it would be much better to repeal the taxes upon knowledge than the taxes upon beer. The fi at he thought much more important, as affecting the welfare of the country. Under these circumstances he felt it was his duty to vote against the motion of the Hon. Member. Mr. SPOONER said the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated that, the duty on malt having been lowered in 1815, in 1816, and 1817, instead of an increase there was a decrease of the con sumption. Did the Right Hon. Gentleman recollect that in 1816 the harvest was an exceedingly wet one, and the barley consequently good for nothing; and that in 1817 there was a failing crop, and that the price greatly increased ?—(Hear, hear.) He would not confine him self, however, to those two years, but would take the average of ten years. Did the Right Hon. Gentleman recollect the bad harvest of 1821, the distress of 1822, and the panic of 1825, which threw the whole commer cial world into confusion? Taking the average of the whole period, he maintained that the Right Hon. Gen tleman's argument could not be sustained. If the re cei,sion of duties did not increase consumption, what be came of the argument in favour of free trade—that such was the tendency of every reduction?—(Hear, hear.) The present system compelled the labouring man to go to the beer-shop instead of drinking his own ale at home. lie did not understand why they should take off the tax on food coming from other countries, and put heavy texes on their own produce. He was quite astonished at the speech which was made by the Right Hon. Gen tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer in opposition to this motion; but the fact was, there were so few Members in the House ho thought he was at liberty to say anything. Ho deprecated the notion of the GoVern ment coming to their conc l us i ons on th e ev id en ce of men theorists, instead of obtaining the opinions of practical r fe . s s i l o e n s a t e l amdeonf being the h t r esult en t vofe one the a experiments to thed g a advantage t a t h e e of grains over every other kind of food in feeding cows, it was well known to any persons who were, as h e wa s, ac customed to visi t the milk hous e s in th e m e t ro p o li s , th a t where their foo d was composed two parts of grains, and the other of any other kind of f oo d, th e y gave th e b est m ilk, to and also got Smithfield-13:atAX: t if it was n ecessar y t o sen d t h em be as good m eat as t for slaughter they wer e f oun d t o !a o o d sition to the evidence of tho se theorists, that very discovered also, in opposition any other.—(H ear , h ear .) I t was beer could be mad e o f d r i e d barley, wilh a small mixture of raw grain: the all the beer in Edinburghwot(ts;nsmsaadlte. fr o om tha n t . the Government And at one limo Excise, however, put a stop to r h e e mg him to were actually preventing a ai , n ) ao o u n ru se of produce in any way he pleased, and com pe l l ing his li ow n raw produce. malt and get beer therefrom for getting the duty from him.—(Hear, hear. not be asked to allow e ver y man to use his own they commo dity as he pleased?—(Hear, hear.) Th, re was noote class of production taxed in the same way, and h e thought that a great case of injusice and hardship had been made out. 'lhis he thought was proved to be a most unjust and oppressive tax, and one that should speedily be repealed, and he would tLerefore give his cordial sup port to the motion of his Hen. Friend the Member for the North Riding of Yorkshire. Mr. HEY‘VORTH considered that all such taxes should be removed, and the expenditure of the country maintained by a direct taxation on every individual, from the highest to the lowest. As, however, no substi tute was proposed fur the abolition of this tax, ho could not (as we understood) support the motion. Mr. PACKS, in dissenting from the motion, said that he bad ever opposed the repeal of the malt-tax, particu larly on the ground that it should be considered as mere portion of the revenue. He also had another rea son for opposing it, timely, that at present jt , yip 411. possible for foreigners to introduce malt into this coun try, and that he was of opinion that if this tax were once rcpt aled the restriction on them could no longer be kept up, and that then they would be enabled to com pete with euccess against the home-producer.—(Hear, hear.) He should like, therefore, to have a pledge from those Honourable Gentlemen who supported this motion, to the effect that foreign malt should not be introduced into this country free of duty. He was one of those who would vote for the motion if he thought that such a measure was likely to benefit the farmers; but, as he was of opinion that if they once repealed the malt tax they could not allow malt to be an exception to all other itrapooF, and that f_rreign malt would then come in duty free, and undersell the home produce, he could not give his support to the motion. If he thought tbat the repeal of the malt tax would serve the farmers he would vote for it, but as he thought it would have the re verse effect he would give it his decided opposition. Mr. L. HODGES opposei the motion on the grounds that he did not see how the deficiency in the Exchequer wag to be supplied otherwise than by an enormous in creae in the property tax. He hoped yet to see an abatement of the duty on malt and hops, but he would oppose the motion because he thought that a total repeal of the malt tax would press heavily on the farmer., par ticularly on the poor ones, 1)7 compelling the Govern ment t r adopt an increased taxation on property. Mr. K. SEYMER said the regulations of the Excise were very vexatious. It was anomalous to maintain the principle of free trade and retain these excise duties. He tbuught the pressure of free trade bore so heavily on the agricultural classee, as to impose upo❑ them the ne cessity of giving them all the relief they could. The late small mrjority of twenty was in fact a proof that it was the opinion of the House that some relief should be given to agriculture. He considered protection some thing more than a landlord's question. Under a system of free import, they could oily have the continental prices of core. It was said it was of no consequence to the farmer whether the price of wheat was sixty or thirty shillings a quarter, provided he produced double the quantity. This was a fallacy, for he contended that the farmer could never double his produce without proportionally increasing his expenses. He did not think that the labourers or farmers could ever return to the old practice of brewing their own beer, bet the repeal of the duty would make beer cheap, and he was satisfied that beer could not be too cheap for the people of this country, for it was a beverage abso lutely necessary to enable them to execute the heavy work they had to do. It was not only necessary for working men, but for women also, who worked hard. In fact, ladies in their own class drank beer at their meals. —(Laughter.) They were often ordered by their physi cians to do so. But whether they were or not, he knew they drank i►. It was therefore incorrect to say that the taste for drinking beer had decreased. He would sup port any tax that did not press unfairly upon the agri cultural interest, and he could not say more. The Mem ber for Montrose in 1834 said that if the agricultural classes obtained the repeal of the malt-tax they would be content to yield the principle of free trade. Well, he would now take the converse of that statement.— (Hear, hear.) If the farmers from the present pres sure could not go to the grocer, that might not be a reason for protection, but certainly it was one why they should be relieved from an unfair tax. lie called upon them all, in the name of free trade, to vote for the motion. Mr. WILSON said, the meaning which he attached to the phrase "free trade," was this, that duties on im ports should be imposed, not for the purpose of protec tion, but of revenue, and tbat their produce should go into the Exchequer instead of into the pockets of a class. A question had been raised as to whether the malt duty was a tax on the producer or the consumer. Operating as it necessarily must as a restriction on the consumption of the article, like all similar duties, it was undoubtedly a tax upon the producer. At the same time he must ask what were the peculiar circumstances connected with the malt-tax which should induce the House at this time to repeal it, and thereby sacrifice 5,000,0001. of revenue? The tax on malt did not operate as prejudicially as many other taxes on articles of consumption, and its repeal would afford but li.tle relief to the agricultural interest, because the anticipated iccreasedconsumPtion of the article must be supplied by importations from abroad. It was said, however, that our farmers would be able to grow more barley in place of wheat, which could be supplied by importation. Bat it had been stated in the course of the discussion that we imported large quantities of barley as well as wheat ; the amount of barley imported last year being not less than a million quarters.—(" It will not malt.") Well, a large por tion of the barley grown in this country would not malt. TI e Hon. Mover compared the tax on malt with that which formerly existed on raw cotton, but the Hon. Gentleman should bear in mind that the tax on cotton was applicable to the export trade. The Hon. Mover re ferred also to the drawback of half the duty on soap which was allowed to cotton and other manufacturers; but, when beer was exported, the exporters obtained a draw back equal to the amount of the duty on the malt employed in the manufacture of the article. Hon. Gen tlemen opposite said that a new policy had been intro duced—that the corn-laws had been repealed, and tha►, therefore, they were justified in asking for the repeal of the malt-tar.—(Hear, hear.) Admit the principle and it would be impossible to stop there. What was the story brought by every West India mail? Why, this:—" By your free-trade measures you have deprived us of protec tion, and therefore we have a right to be placed on an equal footing with the home farmers, and our produce should be admitted duty free."—(Cheers from the Oppo sition.) Hon. Members cheered, but did they not see if they acted on that principle it must h ad to the repeal of the Customs duties altogether?—(Cheers repeated.) He could not understand those cheers, because Honourable Members who supported the motion had pointed to tho Customs as the source from which the deficiency of re venue that the repeal of the malt-tax must occasion might be supplied. The Honourable Member for Warwick shire, in particular, suggested a duty on corn. Wr.at eas that but a proposal to un!ax beer in order to tax bread.—(" Oh, oh!") If every article the pro duce c f British industry was to be imported duty free, ti e House must be prepared to repeal at ore fell swoop about 32,000 000/. of annual taxation.—(" Oh!" and laughter.) The tax on molt was not so onerous as the taxes on some other articles of consumption. The tax on malt was 57 per ceat.—(" A hundred per cent.") It was 100 per cent. on the raw barley, but only 57 per cent. on malt.—(" Hear," and laughter.) He would deal with the malt tax as the tax on other articles, and estimate its amount when the article reached the con sumer. The tax on malt was 57 per cmt.; that on English spirits 333 per cent.; on tea, 200; and on to bacco, 1,200 per cent. Under these circumstances there was no ground for urging that the tax on malt was ex cessivtly heavy. Viewed in any light the malt tax was undoubtedly a consumer's tax, and it must be ad mitted that the House was never better employed than in reducing the burdens which pressed upon consumers It must be admitted, too, that in the course if the last eight or ten years Parliament had travelled very far in that direction. Mr. Tierney's authority bad been ap pealed to, in order to show that an Opposition was en titled to vote for the repeal of any tax, without regard to consequences; but he dissented from that doctrine, and thought that no Member was justified in voting fir such a reduction of taxation as . would impair the revenue, and endanger public credit.—(Cries of " Divide.") He had not yet heard how the expenditure was to be re duced by 5,000,0001., or how the deficiency was to be supplied, and until he saw how that was to be done, he was entitled to say that a vote of that ll , ruse to throw away 5,000,000/. of revenue would be tantamount to a breach of faith with the public creditor.—(" 06, oh!" and " Divider) Ile repeated it; and he knew no class in this country who were so deeply interested in the maintenance of the public credit as the working popula tion of this country; for the first intimation that this vote had been agreed to would paralyze private credit, and create such distrust in the manufacturing districts as must end in throwing a large number of the working population out of employment.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. DISRAELI should have been content to give a silent vote upon this subject had not a reference made by the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Ex chequer permitted him to hope that the House would excuse him for stating the reason of the vote he was about to give. He could not consider the proposi tion before them to repeal the malt-tax without taking into consideration the state and condition of the agricultural classes of this country, inasmuch as barley was one of the principal articles of the produce of those classes.—(Hear, hear.) Great and grievous as was the depression of the agri cultural classes,it was not, upon his side of the House, unr xpected.—(Hear, hear.) ender the circumstances he • thought he had a right to expect from the Government (and he was surprised that so few members of the Go went had spoken), before they negatived the proposition cf the Hon. Member for the North Riding, some clear and succinct view of what they thought would be the future condition of the agricultural classes.—(He ir, hear.) They (the Protectionists) knew that it was one of great distress —they had predicted that distress, and they were prepared, if they had an opportunity, to at tempt to remedy it. Those on the other side of the House had denied that this distress would occur, and yet so great had been the severity that they bad been obliged to ac knowledge it, and almost from the first day of the session they had, with the view of cheering and solacing the agri cultural classes been predicting and promising that it was transient, and would soon pass away. Now he wished the House to observe the conduct of those who, particularly represented the agricultural classes in that House. Very early in the session he himself had had tho honour of proposing a measure of a remedial cha racter to the consideration of the House. There were many gentlemen present who might have conscientiously behaved that had that measure been carried it would not have produced the good effects which he anticipated; but all would acknowledge that a very great party in that House were not of that opinion, and that, though that proposition was ni t carried, it was:negatived, in one of the fullest Houses of the session, only by a bare ma jority.—(Hear, hear.) What was the character of that measure. Was it of an extravagant kind? Was it of a very unreasonable and intemperate nature? On the con trary, all acknowledged its moderation, and even the Mi nisters who opposed it adduced as one of the arguments against it that it was really of too insignificant a charac ter to effect any good object. That measure was op posed by the Government, and negatived by the House. Again, at a subsequent period, another Hon. Member— a gentleman on the other side of the House—brought forward another proposition to remedy all the alleged distress and suffering of the agricultural classes. In one instance, their attention had been called to an essentially practical measure to reduce the peculiar burdens on the agricultural classes. They rejected it. In the next in stance they were asked to agree to a motion, the virtual character and acknowledged tendency of which was to im pose a moderate duty o n f ore i gn agr i cu lt u r a l produ c e. They reject edit ed t by a large majority; but all that time the House acknowledged, nevertheless, the distress and de pression of the agricultural classes.—(Hear, hra,r.) Well, the distress still existing, increasing in severity, end the session (halving to a close, another propos).- Lion was made again by a Whig Member, the tendency of which was again to relieve the suffering of those classes. He could not consider that, question upon its mere abstract merits or demerits. He must look at it with reference to the cla , s on whose fortunes it was par ticularly calculated to bear an influence.—(flt ar, hear.) After the speech which they had just heard from the Hon.lMember for Westbury, he must take a general view of the mode in which the taxation of this country was produced, and he would do it in one sentence. It was pro duced, generally speaking, by three modes—firstly, by duties on imports; secondly, by a system of inland taxa tion; and, thirdly, by a system of local contribution. Now, there was not a single article of our imports which could come int ) competition with our home agricultural productions which was not at this moment, generally speaking, admitted free.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to the second source of revenue—th© inland taxation—a great portion, he tnightsilYTTe greater portion, was di reedy contributed by the land or its productions. — (Hear, hear.) And with regard to the third branch of the revenue—the lot.al taxation—the whole cf it was raised from the land and its adjuncts. Now, he asked the House could that system go on much longer ?—(Cheers.) He said that that was a state of things that could no longer be endured, and he must consider the proposition DOW before the House with rs ference to recent legislation, and the suffering condition of the agricultural classes. It brought them to this point, that the House and the country must decide the principles upon which the re venue of the country must in future be n ainly raised. That was the point which the people of the United Kingdom must ultimately, must even speedily decide upon. Acknowledging the burden of public tax, , s, they must decide whether those taxes were most grievous when they were raised ext really or internally.—(Hear.) It was a controversy, he would not say whether the fo reigner paid any portion of a Customs duty,—he hardly thought that there was any gentleman who would maintain that thesis ; b u t it was a controversy to wha' degree the foreigner might contribute to a Customs duty. However, no o ne wou ld maintain that a fo reigner paid an Excise duty, or that he contributed any portion to that duty. He maintained, therefore, that in considering the financial condition of this country they should adopt it as a principle that all alleviation of tax ation should arise from the reduction of Excise, and not Customs—(Hear)—and he must repeat that he could not understand the chain of reasoning of the Hon. Member for Westbury, by which he seemed to infer that gentle men upon his (Mr. Disraeli's) side of the House were attempting to substantiate a proposition quite the re verse of that.—(fleas.) The Hon. Member drew an illustration, pursuing the same fallacious argument, from the condition of our colonies. If there were one propo sition which was more generally admitted than another it was the necessity of consolidating our colonial empire. Now, he did not understand by what means they could consolidate it unless they reduced to a fact the phrase of the political economists, that the colonies of England ought to be upon the same footing as the counties of England.—(Hear.) But it was always raid that it was impossible to put the colonies upon the same footing with the counties, because they did not bear the same Excise duties. Now, if upon a late occasion the House had directed their attention to the Excise, and not to the Customs, they would have destroyed that great barrier to colonial consolidation ; and, while they relieved the distress of the people, they would have increased the imperial strength of this still great empire.—(Cheers.) He warned the House against the dangerous fallacy of taking the state of the revenue as the index of the national prosperity. He never would admit that the state of the revenue was an infallible or the only test. or even the principal test of the prosperity of the country.—(Hear, hear.) But he would say to the Government, that if they were pre pared to come forward and do justice to the land of the United Kingdom, then the land could take into conside ration what degree of sacrifice it could make for the common good.—(Hear, hear.) But when the Govern meat pursued a eourse which grievonsly.injured that great interest, with whose welfare the interests of millions were bound up, and when the Government declared they would offer no relief to that interest, then they forced the Opposition to support measures of relief that, if the Government had exhibited a different disposition, they might not have supported.—(Cheers.) If Ministers had said that the Government would take the present state of the agricultural interest into its consideration, that ap peal, upon an occasion like the present, would have been listened to with respect and attention. But Parliament had now been sitting for six months ; during that time the distress had been aggravated, but had the Government taken one step to alleviate it ? Why, if they were a Ministry of the Manchester school they might say, " What you consider depression we consider prosperity; and we regard low prices as a source cf g eneral content." But the Opposition faced a Ministry who, when the agri cultural interests complained of suffering, rose to acknow ledge it, but who said that higher prices were coming.— (Hear, hear.) Now that Hon. Members around him were going back t) their counties, he wanted to knew what they were authorised to say to their constitu ents.—(Cheers.) He wanted to be enabled to tell them at what point, in the opinion of the Government, cheap ness would become a curse.—(Cheers.) Because, if he were able to tell that her Majesty's Ministers, while consistently acknowledging that cheapness was the only object that the Government ought to attempt to realise, were prepared to recognise increased evidences of ne tt onal prosperity in wheat at 20s. a g ratter, then their constituencies would be able to comprehend their posi tion and their chance of relief from the existing Go vernment.—(Cheers.) But if they found themselves in this awkward position, that they had to meet their suffering constituents, and to tell them that, while the Government deplored their di,trcss, they were sanguine it would soon pass away, an.i t' at they would receive remunerating prices; that meanwhile they were to continue to bear the whole kcal taxation of the country, with slight exceptions; that they sere to endure unrestrict d competition with the foreign producer; —then he could understand them to say that such a Government, sympathising with their suffering and promising teem relief, but not attempting les their policy to accomplish that re lief, was a Govern ment entitled to their indignant opposition.—(Cheers.) But if, on the other hand, they were to be told that affairs were administered by a sincere free- trade Go vernment, who held free trade to be the greatest blessing to this country—that land was to continue to bear its disproportionate share e f local burdens and inland taxa tion, and the farmers were still to meet unrestricted com petition with the foreigner—if they were to be told that there was to be no steps taken to remedy their suffer ings, and that the Government could hold out no hope of relief from more remunerative pricer, then he could understand their constituents to say, " We observe you are in opposition to a free-trade Government act ing on distinct principles and aiming at distinct re sults; such men we fear, but we respect. In them we know what we have to deal with—we have to encounter in such an Administration a real and avowed foe. The course of such a Government will neces sarily be the course of men of spirit and honour. eve a r n y d pocsosnivbilcetiomneantshetyo a w g i g il rav f a e t e e l F bo r ti o n m d t p o rin ta c k ip e le our sufferings and to prevent a recurrence of circum stances likely to prove remedial to us; and unless the Government were removed, of which we a , e not very sanguine, we see nothing before us but a career of des pair." Suoh was the language that would express the sentiments entertained by the constituencies of England. He was convinced that if they supported, with success, the motion of the Hon. Member for the North Riding of Yorkshire the effect would be to bring the House to its nses. If the m ot i on were carrie 1, it would not b e pos sible any longer f or a Mi n i stry to exist wh i ch would not de finitely announce that it was not its obj. ct not only to [erpetuate the present suff,riags of the agricultural classes, but to increase them. The question would then be intelligible to them; they would thus terminate for ever a series of experiments ; they would make the House, and the Government which that House supported and created, acknowledge their purpose, and strip away the veil which had too long clouded their features. With these feelings, then, he should support the motion, and he should do so sustained by the sentiments of all the eminent men who pronounced any opinion upon the corn-laws, for they held that the abolition of the one necessarily re quired the repeal of the other. To confirm this, he could quote many authorities, and he could show from the language which they held that the country had often been told that they must submit to the malt-tax in order to avert an income-tax; but now they were burdened with both. The Home should consider all this, that the agricultural int eres t was in a state of unprecedented depression; that the condition of the agriculturists was without hope; and they should consider the enormous injustice of continuing this impost.—(Cheers.) Lord J. RUSSELL said that in one part of the speech of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire lie told the House that the question then before them was not a [arty question, and that he bad that night not dis cussed it as a party man, though the cheers with which that remark was received might naturally have led to an opposite conclusion. Still he accepted the sen timents of the Hon. Gent l eman as they were stated, and he derived great consolation from that declaration; but there were some of the statements of the Hon. member the influence and tendency of which were not quite free from danger. the Hon. Member placed the land apart from and in opposition to all the other inte rests of the country.—(No, no, Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman certainly told the House that if the land re ceived just and fair consideration the owners and occu piers of the soil would then consider what sacrifices they would make fur the good of the community at large. In dm statement there was at h est some ambiguity. Sup pose they were to repeal the sum, nearly amounting to 5,000,0001., which constituted the malt- tax ; suppose they were to repeal the rest of the ;excise, to the extent of 10,000,0001., and that p ublic credit was shaken to its base, what consolation would any Government have in being able to say that they had folloWed the advice of Hon. Members on the (Vier side of the House? He saw, however, with great satisfaction, that the leader of a great party in another piece gave an opinion op posed to the present motion, and said that if he were a Member of the Islou-e of Commons he should not vote which produced a revenue of for a repeal of a tax 4,500 0001. That was the opinion of Lord Stanley— Art . He said— the opinion of the leader of a gr eat p y " I con'etts that if I were a Member of the House of Commons, I should be rather inclined to coincide with the latter than the former, and think no officer in oppo sition would vote for the remissi.,n of a duty involving 4,500,000/. without being provided with some means by which the deficiency m i g ht be made good." (Hear.) For his own part, it was satisfactory to him to find that the Hon. Gentleman did not represent the sen timents of Lord Stanley. At that late hour he should not enter into the particulars which the Hon. Member for the North Riding of Yorkshire had given thsni. There were so many particulars in his speech that there would not be time to enter into them, but he might ob serve that for not less than three-quarters of a century, namely, from the year 1775 to the present time, the principle of the malt-tax had been recognized by Mem bers of that House, and by political economists. No less a Me,IS Sim Adam had paid that 260. of 270, per quarter' might be collected from malt more cattily and without so much burdening tt e community as it might be from other articles. The Hun. Mt mb for Buck inghamshire bad t >ld the House that the present policy of the Government had proved destructive to the agri cultural interest, and they had also been told that the unexampled distress of that part of the community had taken the Government by surprise. He must say that they had not experienced any surprise whatever—he never supposed that, in the great transition which the country had undergone. suffering could have been alto gether avoided. The Hon. Member opposite asked, with great appearance of triumph, whether this was a benefit or an evil; on these peieti, however, he bad given opi nions frequently upon former occasions when other op portunities of discussing them had been afforded; but, considering all the circumstances of the country, whether living under protection or free-trade, ho could under no circumstances resist the conclusion that whe ther prices were high or low, whether they tank or rose, the Government should never seek by the intro duction of an Act of Parliament to produce artificial prices. That was a plain proposition. Whether Hon. Gentlemen considered that prices were at present not re munerative to the producers of the country, or whether they considered them generally beneficial to the country; whether they considered them one thing or another, the principle of legislation on the subject was a principle per fectly clear, and by which the Government meant to abide.—(Cheers.) Whether prices remained at their present level, or whether they sank below it, they would not attempt to raise the price of the food of the people of Englsnd.— (Cheers, and cries of "Oh I") And that was his answer to the question of the Hon. Gentleman. He would leave prices to ho regulated by the supply of this country and of the world, and ho would not inter fere with prices, whatever they might happen to be.— (Hear.) But how was the prosperity of the agricultural interest consistent with the prosperity of all the great interests which together formed the well-being of this country ? It appeared to him that they were perfectly ' consistent with each other. The ordinary taxes of the country were taxes imposed for the benefit of the state. Bet there were other taxes of very great amount, some Fart of which went into the Exchequer, but the greater part of which went into the pockets of particular classes and interests, and which wore a very great burden on the people, without yielding any benefit whatever to the Exchequer, or assisting to pay either the debt or the establishments of the country.—(Hear, hear.) Some of these taxes were no longer maintained, and their di inanition tended to increase the prosperity of the people and enabled them to bear the taxes which were abso lutely necessary. He would instance the case of sugar. The diminution of the revenue from sugar was not very considerable. But if they compared the price of the 200,000 tons of sugar consumed in 1845 with the price of the same quantity consumed in the present year, they would find that the diminution of the price to the consumer in the present year was no less than 5,000,0001. But the loss to the revenue was not 5,000,0001, but much less. It was obvious then, that when such a great diminution of taxation took place, and when the people were enabled to consume articles of necessity at a much less price than before, they bad the greater means of consuming exciseable articles, and the greater ability to contribute to the revenue of the country.—(Hear, hear.) This result was seen that very day in the returns of the revenue, in which they found, that notwithstanding the diminution of taxation that had taken place in exciseable articles, the Excise revenue had not only increased, but the general state of the revenue was also increasing and advancing.— (Hear, hear, and cheers) Another proof of the ad vantage of the plan which the Government had been pursuing was the return of the exports which had lately been laid on the table. He found that while the value of the exports for the month of June, 1849, amounted to 4,355,7831, the exports for the corresponding month in 1850 amounted to 5,959,9494 being an increase of no less than 1,604,1601. on a single month.—(Hear.) again, he took the first five months cf 1849, and com pared them with the first five months of 1850, he found that in 1849 the value of the exports was 21,191,973/., while the value of these of 1850 was 26,027,9481., being ac increase of nearly 5,000,0001. If, again, they compared those with the exports of the same period of 1848, they would find that the increase was about 8,000,0001.—(Hear, hear.) What did this imply? It implied that great numbers of people were employed at good wages, that they were able to consume the corn of the agriculturists and the sugar of the colonists, and all the various articles which contributed to the Excise and the other branches of the revenue of the country.— (Hear, hear.) It was in vain to tell him that in a country where manufactures were advancing at such a pace the agricultural interest would be left behind, and must long remain in a state of suffering.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) represented the landed interest as if for a long series of years they had been falling into a state of depression, from which they could never recover. He maintained that the reverse was the case—(Cheers)—that in consequence of the in crease in the manufactures and commerce of the country, both the owners and the occupiers of the land had been enabled to exchange their products at a much greater value than they formerly did.—(Cheers, and cries of " Oh!") He regretted he had not the tables there to prove it; but would Hon. Gentlemen who cried " Oh !" be good enough to look at the rent of land and the re turns of the income-tax for the last year, and compare them with the returns fur the years 1775 and 1790, and then tell him that the rent of the land and the return.; received from land had not greatly increased in the course of that time?—(Loud cheers.) And what had been the main cause of that increase? The main cause had been the increase of our manufactures, and the pro digous exertions of those who were engaged in the trade and commerce of the country. The Hon. Gen tleman had asked him for the decision of the Govern ment upon this question. He begged to tell the Hon. Gentleman mat what the Government main tained was this, that whatever immediate loss or im mediate difficulties might be caused to the agricultural interest by the great transition which was taking place in our social laws, that loss and those difficulties would be more than obviated by the general increase in the prosperity of the country, and that to enable the people to obtain their food at the cheapest rate at which it could be procured, and to exchange the products of their industry with foreign nations, would aff Id the best foundation for the increased prosperity of the land.— (Cheers.) He beieved that it would be an entirely false and injurious policy if, like the Hon. Gentleman, they at eesptel to found that prosperity upon the princi ple of separating the prosperity of the land from the welfare of the other interests of the country. He be lieved that the welfare of all the great interests of the country were inseparably bound up with each other, and that the welfare of all these great interests was that which the Government had consulted.—(Hear, hear.) With these principles therefore he asked the House not to consent to the motion of the Hon. Member for the North Riding. The Honourable Gentleman the Member for Buckinghamshire had said that they overtaxed land, and that Customs' duties were almost entirely rejected by them. The fact was, however, that the Customs' duties amounte 1 to nearer 23,000,0001. than 22,000,0001., which, according to his view, was charged upon the consumer, but which, according to the Hon. Gentleman's theory, was charged upon the foreigner. What would he have more ? (Hoar, hear.) Even if they took the income-tax and the local taxation of the country, of which so great a portion was charged upon the commercial and manu. facturing interests of the country, they would find that there was nothing like the sum raised from those sources that was raised from Customs' duties.—(Hear, hear.) He did hope, then, that the House would, as they had hitherto done, maintain that system of commercial policy they had of late years adopted—that they would not endanger the national credit by taking away at once nearly 5,000,0001. of taxes; that they would not reject the wise advice of Lord Stanley, who had declared that if he were a Member of that House he would vote with the Government on this occasion; but that they would save the credit of the country and persevere in th at system which he considered wise for all the interests of the country.—(Cheers.) Mr. CAYLEY replied. The Hon. Gentleman con tended that no valid argument had been offered against the repeal of the tax, which was only an act of justice both to the producer and the consumer.—(Hear.) The House then divided. The numbers were— For the motion 123 Against it Majority —124 The motion was consequently lost. RAILWAYS ABANDONMENT BILL On the motion that this Bill be read a third time, Mr. CHAPLIN moved that the proviso to the 19th clause be omitted. After a conversation, in which Mr. Page Wood, Mr. Stephenson, and Mr. Newlegate took part, The SOLICITOR-GENERAL consented, on the part of the Government, to the withdrawal of the proviso. Mr. TURNER and Mr. HENLEY supported the proviso. The House divided, when there appeared— For the retention of the proviso l5 Against it Majority —62 The Bill was passed with verbal amendments. The other orders were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Half-past Two. MARYLEBONE SAVINGS' BANK, WELBECK-STREET.—Established July 5, 1830. COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF PROGRESS, AT SPECIFIED PERIODS, DURING THE LAST SEVEN YEARS. Open Deposit Accounts. Sums invested with Na donut Debte ommissioners On JULY 5,1844-1 • „ „ 1845 ...I ff ft 1846 ... " 1847 ••• " " 1848. ” 1849 ... „ „ 1850 ... £14,633 15,724 16,729 17,939 18,564 19,848 20,866 D. FINNEY, So £340,509 356,265 346,977 319,340 284,757 30 ' ,663 315,638 ;retary and Actuary. Dispatches were sent off last evening from the Co lonial-office, fur the governors of the North American colonic EADVERTISEMENT.] — Cured by Holloway's Oint ment and Pills, Wounds in a Leg after more than Three Years' suffering.—The wife of Mr. James Springle, schoolmaster, of the town of St. Patrick, Grenada, had been suffering from an ulcerated leg for more than three years. which was so bad that it baffled the skill of the professional practitioners in the island, who could not possibly heal it. After every other remedy had failed, Holloway's Ointment and Pills were resorted to, and by their powerful efficacy the wounds were soon healed, and a per fectly sound cure effected. These medicines excel all others in the cure of scrofula or king's evil, glandular, and other un natural swellings.—Sold by all Druggists, and at Professor Holloway's Establishment, 244, Strand, London. Lately, as a railway train was approaching Cork, a man was observed with his neck lying over one of the rails. On the instant the driver sounded the whistle, the man awoke, qu'ckly drew back his head, and the train passed within a band's breadth of his face. A moment luteed fir the yfhplo trouuctiva. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.) THURSDAY, JULY 4. lIOIIE-MADE SPIRITS IN BOND BILL. Order for Second Reading read ; Motion made, and Ques tion proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."— Amendment proposed, to leave out the word " now," and at the end of the question to add the words " upon this day three months :"—Question proposed, " That the word 'now' stand part of the Question :" DOA e arising; Motion made, and Question put, " That the Debate be now adjourned." The House divided:— THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 6, 1850. MINORITY-AYES, 95. Acland, Sir T. D. Hatchell, John Paget, Lord Clarence Adair, It. A. Shafto Hawes, B. Palmerston, Via. Baines, M. T. Hayter, W. G. Parker, John Baring, Sir F. Headlam, T. E. Price, Sir R. Bellew, R. M. Heald, James l'usey, Philip Berkeley, Ilenry F. Henry, Alexander Ricardo, Osman Bernal, Ralph Heywood, James Rich, henry Birch, Sir T. Ileyworth, L. Robartes, T. J. Bouverie, E. P. 11111, Lord M. Romilly, Colonel Boyle, Colonel Ilobhouse, Sir John Romilly, Sir John Brocklehurst, John Hobliouse, T. B. Russell, Lord John Brotherton, Joseph Hodges, T. L. Russell, F. C. Carter, J. B. Holland, Robert Seymour, Lord Cavendish, C. C. Howard, Lord E. Smith, John:Abel Cavendish, G. H. Howard, C. W. G. Somerville, Sir W. Cavendish, W. G. Howard, E. G. Spearman, H. J Chohneley, Sir M. Butt, William Stansfleld, W. R. C. Clay, James Jackson, William Stahton, W 11. Coke, E. K. Jervis, Sir John Thornely, T. Cowper, W. F. Kershaw, James Tollemache, F. J. Craig, Sir W. G. Lascelles, W. S. Tufnell, Relay Dundas, Admiral Lewis, G. C. Vivian, J. H. Dundas, Sir D. Martin, C. W. Wakley, Thomas Ebrington, Viscount Mailieson, Colonel Watki*i, Colonel Elliot, John E. Maule, Fox Willcox, Brodie Foley, J. H. Melgund, Viscount Wilson, James Fortescue, J. W. Mitchell, T. A. Wilson, Matthew Fox, W. J. Morison, Sir,W. Wood, Sir Charles Freestun, Colonel Morris, David Wood, W. P. Grey, Sir G. Mostyn, E. M. L. they, It. W. Mulgrave, Earl Hardcastle, J. A. Ogle, S. C. Harris, Richard Paget,,Lord A. TELLER/. Bass, M. T. Wyld, James MAJORITY—NOES, 135. Adderley, C. B. Fitzpatrick, J. W. Moore, G. H. Archdall, Captain Floyer, John Mun dy, William Baldock, E. 11. Forbes, W. Muntz, G. F. Bateson, Thomas Fortescue, Chichester Norreys, Sir D. Beresford, William Fox, S. L. Nugent, Sir Percy Blackall, S. W. Frewen, C. H. O'Brien, Sir Lucius Blair, Stephen Gaskell J. M. O'Brien, Joha Blake, M. J. Goddard, A. L. O'Brien, Sir Timothy Booth, Sir R. G. Gooch, E. S. O'Connell, Maurice Boyd, John Gordon, Admiral O'Connell, M. J. Bramston, T. W. Gore, W. R. 0. O'Flaherty, Anthony Breinridge, Richard Grattan, Henry _Puke, C. W. Buck, Lewis W. Greenali, Gilbert Pilkington, James Buller, Sir J. Y. Greene, Joha Plowden, W. H. Burghley, Lord Grogan, Edward Plumptre, J. P. Burke, Sir Thomas Hallyburton,Lord J. Portal, Melville Carew, W. H. P. Halsey, T. P. Rawdon, Colonel Chichester, Lord J. Hamilton, Geo. A. Reynolds, John Christy, Samuel Hamilton, J. H. Roche, E. B. Clements, Charles Hamilton, Lord C. Sadleir, John Clive, H. B. Hastie, Alexander Sandal's, George Cobbold, John C. Hastie, Archibald Scully, Francis Cole, H. A. Henley, J. W. Smythe, George Colvile, C. R. Herbert, H. A. Somerset, Captain Conolly,Thomaa Hildyard, T. B. T. Sotheron, T. H. Corry, H. L. Hill, Lord E. Spooner, Richard Cotton, W. H. Jolliffe, Sir W. G. Stafford, Augustus Cowan, Charles Jones, Captain Stanley, Edward Crawford, W. S. Keating, Robert Stuart, Henry Davie, Sir Henry Keogh, William Sturt, Henry G. Devereux, John T. Knox, Colonel Sullivan, Michael Dod, J. W. Lewisham, Viscount Talbot, J. 11. Dodd, George Lockhart, W. Taylor, T. E. Duckworth, Sir J. Lowther, Colonel Tenison, E. K. Duff, G. S. Lowther, Henry Terinent,lß. J. Duff, James M'Cullagh, W. Thompson, Colonel Duncan, George M'Gregor, John Trollope, Sir J. Duncuft, John Meagher, Thomas Verner, Sir W. Dundas, G. Mahon, O'Gorman Vesey, Thomas Dunne, Colonel Manners, Lord J. Vyse, R. H. Du Pre, C. G. Masterman, J. Wawn, J. T. Edwards, Henry Maxwell, J. P. Williams, T. P. Ellice, 8., jun. Miles, William Wynn, Sir W. Fagan, William Milner,".W. - M. TELLERS. Farrel', James Moffatt, George Naas, Lord Ferguson, Sir R. Mansell, William Mackenzie, W. F. FRIDAY, JULY 5. MALT-TAX. Motion made, and Question put, " That leave be given to bring in a Bill to repeal the Malt-tax." The House divided : MINORITY—AYES, 123. Adderley, C. E. Drummond, Henry Mundy, William Aglionby, H. A. Dunne, Colonel Neeld, Joseph Alcock, Thomas Du Pre, C. G. Newdegate, C. N. Anstey, T. C. Edwards, Henry Nugent, Sir Percy Arbnthnott, 11. Evelyn, W. J. O'Connor, Feargus Archdall, Captain Farnham, E. B. Palmer, Robert Bagge, William Fellowes, E. Pechell, Sir G. Baget,Hon. W. Floyer, John Plumptre, J. P. Bailey, Joseph Fuller, A. E. Portal, Melville Baillie, H. J. Galway, Viscount Pusey, P. Barrington, Viscount Gooch, E. S. Raphael, Alexander Bass, Thomas Gore, W. 0. Reudlesham, Lord Bennet, Philip Gore, W. R. 0. Rushout, Captain Beresford, William Granby, Marquis of Salwey, Colonel Best, John Grattan, Henry Scholefleld, William Blackstone, W. Greene, John Scott, Francis Blair, Stephen Guernsey, Lord Seymer, H. K. Blake, M. J. Halford, Sir Henry Sibthorp, Colonel Bramston, T. W. Hall, Colonel Simeon, John Broadley, Henry Harris, Captain Smyth, John George Brooke, Lord Heneage, Edward Somerset, Captain Bruce, C. L. C. Henley, J. W. Sotheron, T. H. S. Buck, L. W. Hildyard, T. B. T. Spooner, Richard Burrell, Sir C.l Hood, Sir Alexander Stafford, Augustus Burroughes, 11. liernby, John S'Anford, J. F. Cabbell, B. B. Jolliffe, Sir W. G. Stanley, Edward Cayley, E. S. Kerrison, Sir E. Stuart, J. Chaplin, W. J. Knight, F. W. Start, 11. - G. Chatterton, Colonel Knightley, Sir C. Taylor, Thomas E. Cholmeley, Sir M. Lacy, H. C. Thompson, Colonel Cobbold, J. C. Lascelles, E Thornhill, G. Codrington, Sir W. Lennard, T. B. Trollope, Sir J. Coles, Henry B. Lennox, Lor I A. Tyrell, Sir J. Compton, H. C. Lennox, Lord Ii G. Vyse, 11. It. 11. Cotton, W. H. lewi,ham, Vis. Waddington, David Crawford, W. S. Long, Walter Waddington, 11. S. Cubitt, William Manners, Lord G. Wegg-Prosser, F. Curteis, - .H. M. Manners, Lord J. Worcester, Marquis Devereux, J. T. - March, Earl of Wyld, James Dickson, Samuel Maunsell,:T. P. TELLERS. Disraeli, B. Miles, W. Christopher, H. A. Dod, J. W. Mullings, J. R. Freweu, C. H. MAJORITY—NOES, 247. Abdy, Sir Thomas Gladstone, W. E. Norreys, Lord Aeland, Sir T. Greene, Thomas Norreys, S!r D. Adair, Hugh E. Grenfell, Charles W. O'Brien, J. Adair, R. snafto Grey, Sir G. O'Connell, Maurice Armstrong, Sir A. Grey, R. W. Ogle, S. C. Arundel, Earl Of Hall, Sir B. Ord, W. Ashley, Lord Hamilton, Lord C. Owen, Sir John Baines, M. T. llallyburton, Lord Packe, C. W. Baring, Sir F. T. Harcourt, G. Paget, Lord A. Barnard, Edward G. Harris, Richard Paget, Lord C. Berkeley, Admiral Basile, Alexander Paget, Lord G. Berkeley, H. F. Basile, Archibald Pakington, Sir John Berkeley. C. L. G. Ilatchell, John Palmer, Roundel' Bernal, Ralph Hawes, Benj. Palmerston, Viscount Birch, Sir T. Hayter, W. G. Parker, John Blackall, S. W. Ileadlam, T. E. Pelham, D. A. Bouverie, E. P. Heald, James Peto, Samuel M. Bowles, Admiral Heathcote, G. J. Pllkingten, James Boyd, John lienoage, G. H. Plowden, W. H. Boyle, Colone, Henry, Alexander Price, Sir R. Brand, Thomas Herbert, 11. A. Hawdon, Colonel Bright, John Herbert, Sydney Reynolds, John Brocklehurst, J. Hervey, Lord A. Ricardo, Osman Bromley, Robert Heyworth, L. Rice, E. R. Brotherton, J. Ilobliouse, Sir John Rich, Henry Brown, William Hobhouse, T. B. Richards, Richard Buller, Sir J. Y. Hodges, T. L. Hobartes, T. J. A. Bunbury, E 11. Hodges, T. Twisden Roche, E. B. Burke, Sir T. J. Ilogg, Sir J. Hominy, Colonel Buxton, Sir E. Hollond, Robert Romilly, Sir John ' Carter, John B. Howard, Lord E. Rumbold, C. E. Cavendish, C. C. Howard, C. W. Russell, Lord J. Cavendish, G. H. Howard, E. G. Russell, F. C. Cavendish, W. 0 Howard, P. H. Sandars, George Childers, J. W. Howard, Sir R. Scrope, G. P. Christy, Samuel Hughes, W. B. Seymour, Lord Clay, Sir W. Humphery, Aid. Shell, R. L. Clay, James Hutt, William Slaney, R. A. Clerk, Sir G. Inglis, Sir It. H. Smith, Vernon Cockbura, Alex. Jackson, William Smith, J. A. Coke, Edward K. Jermyn, Earl Smith, John B. Colebroeke, Sir T. Jervis, Sir John Somers, J. I'. Collins, William Kershaw, James Somerville, Sir W. Cowan, Charles Kildare, Marquis of Spearman, Ilenry Cowper, W. F. Labouchere, Henry Stanstield, W. It. Craig, Sir W. G. Langston, J. H. Stanton, W. 11. Crowder, R. H. Lascelles, W. S. S.ephenson, Robert Davie, Sir H. Legh, G. C. Strickland, Sir G. Denison, J. E. Lemon, Sir C. Stuart, Lord Dudley D'Eyncourt, C. T. Lewis, Sir T. Stuart, Lord J. Divett, E. Lewis, G. C. Stuart, H. Douglas, Sir C. Lindsay, Colonel Talbot, J. 11. Douro, Marquis of Littleton, E. It. Tancred, H. W. Duff, George Locke, Joseph Tenison, E. K. Duff, James Lowther, Colonel Thompson, Colonel Duke, Sir James Lowther, Henry Thornely, Thomas Duncan, Lord Lygon,General Towneley, John Dtmcan, George Mackie, John Townley, R. G. Duncuft, John M'Cullagh, W. T. Tufnell, H. Dundas, Admiral M'Gregor, John Turner, George Dundas, Sir Jiavid M'Taggart, Sir J. Tynte, Colonel East, Sir.J. B. Mahon, Viscount Vane, Lord H. Ebriugton, Lord Mangles, R. D. Villiers, Charles Egerton, Sir P. Manners, Lord C. Vivian, J. H. Ellice, Edward Mar,hall, J. G. Wall, C. B. Ellice, Edward, jun. Martin, J. Walter, John Ellis, John Martin, C. W. Watkins, Colonel Elliot, John Martin, Samuel Wawn, J. T. Estcourt, J. B. B. Matheson, A. Wellesley, Lord C• Euston, Earl Matheson, J. Westhead, J. P. Evans, J. I Matheson, Colonel Willcox, Brodie E wart, William Maule, Fox Wilson, James Fagan, William Melgund, Viscount Wilson, Matthew Ferguson, Colonel Miles, P. W. S. Wodehouse, E. Ferguson, Sir R. Milner, W. M. Wood, Sir Charles Fitzpatrick, JW. Mitchell, T. A. Wood, W. P. Fitawilliam, G. W Moffatt, George Wortley. S. Foley, John H. Molesworth, Sir W. Wrightson, W.B. Forster, Mathew Monsen, William Wyvill, M. Fertescue. Chichester Moore, G. H. Fortescue, J. W. Mostyn, E. TELLERS. Fox. W. J• Mowatt, Francis Hill, Lord Marcus Freestun, Colonel Mulgrave, Earl Bellew, R. M. Gibson, Thomas M. Noel, G. J. RAILWAYS ABANDONMENT BILL, Read a third time; Amendment proposed page 8, line 32, to leave out from the word " performed" to the end of the Clause : Question put," That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill." The House divided:— MINORITY—AYES, 15. Banbury, E. 11. Inglis, Sir R. Spooner, R. Christy, S. Newdegate, N. Wawn, J. T. Eeteourt, J. B. B. Ricardo, Osman Wodehouse, E. Evans, John Seholefleld, W. TILLERS. Galway, Viscount - Sibthorp, Colonel Turner, George Henley, J. W. Sotheron, T. Wodehouse, Edmund MAJORITY-NOES, 77. THE LATE SIR R. PEEL. &fore this announcement meets the public eye, all that was mortal of this distinguished statesman and lamented individual will rest under the roof of his own much-loved paternal residence of Drayton Manor, in Staffordshire. :- - About six o'clock last evening a plain hearse, drawn by four horses, and followed by a mournii g coach and four, entered Whitehall-garden. On nearing the resi dence of the lamented deceased, a handsome coffin, co vered with crimson velvet, was removed from the hearse and carried on the shoulders of eight men into the man sion. The hearse and mourning coach presently withdrew into Privy gardens, where they remained in waiting. At seven o'clock they returned into Whitehall gardens, and in a very raw moments afterwards the coffin, containing the remains of the lamented deceased, was borne from the mansion through the court-yard, and deposited in the hearse, which had been drawn up at the gates to receive it. The coffin was enclosed in a dark wrapper, but not covered with any pall. It was preceded by two footmen in livery, and followed by Mr Townes, steward for many years past in the Right Hon. Baronet's family. After the coffin had been placed in the hearse, the coach drew up, and received Mr. Frederi c k P ee l, M.P., Viscount Hardinge, Sir James Graham, and the Right lion. H. Goulburn, M.P. The hearse and coach then proceeded at a slow pace th rough Whitehall, and up St. Martin's-lane, in the direct ion of the North-Western Railway station. The removal was witnessed by a large number of par , sons who had assembled in Whitehall-gardens, and as - - the cortege passed through the crowd' largely increased, many persons accompanying the procession throughout the whole line of route. Neither the hearse nor the coach had any feathers, and it was observed that no pages nor undertakers' men accompanied the removal. Mr. Inspector Field, with Sergeant Kendall and Ser geant Thornton, of the Detective Force, and Mr. In spector Darken, of the A Division, were in attendance, the three former officers proceeding to Euston-square with the cortege. Application had been made to the railway authorities to allow the hearse to be placed on a truck and conveyed through to Tamworth by the mail train. This proceed ing is not usual, in consequence of the objection many passengers entertain against travelling in the same train which conveys a deceased person. The company have carriages for the purpose, but, in consequence of a re quest on the part of the family, Captain Huish, the manager of the company, communicated with Mr. Glyn, M.P., chairman of tt.e board of directors, and the result was that instructions were given that the hearse should be conveyed as desired. On the arrival of the cortege at the station, the horses were taken out, and the liters° p'aced upon a truck, under the direction of Mr. Brooks, the superintendent of the b t tion . The truck was subsequently attached to the train, which left town at the usual hour—a quarter to nine o'clock. Viscount liirdinge, Sir James Graham, and Mr. Goulburn remained until after the departure of the train, and then returned home. Mr. Frederick Peel alone accompanied the remains to Tamworth, at which place art angements had been made to receive them by a local undertaker. The funeral will take place on Tuesday next. We are happy to be enabled to add that Lady Peel was more composed yesterday. Her Ladyship will leave town this morning for Marble Hill, Twickenham, the residence of Colonel and Lady Alice Peel, where she will pass a foe days in retirement with her children. COURT CIRCULAR. Lord John Russell had an audience of the Queen yesterday at Buckingham Palace. Her Majesty and Prince Albert, with the Prince of Prussia, took an airing in an open barouche and four yesterday afternoon. The Equerries in Waiting, Colonel Buckley and Lieut.-Colonel the Hon. Alexander Gordon, attended on horseback. His Royal Highness Prince Albert rode out on horseback yesterday morning, attended by Lieut.- Colonel the Hon. A. Gordon. His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, attended by Mr. Birch, took a drive in an open carriage yes terday. Their Royal Highnesses the Princess Royal, Prince Alfred, the Princess Alice, and the younger members of the Royal Family, took their accus tomed airings yesterday in the garden of the Palace. The Royal dinner party at Buckingham Palace yesterday evening included his Royal Highness the Prince of Prussia, his Excellency the Chevalier Bunsen, the Countess of Westmoreland, Lord and Lady John Russell, Count Herrman Puckler, Lieut.- General de Lindheim, and Count Charles de Golta. Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Gloucester visited their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge yesterday, at Cambridge House. A Cabinet Council was held yesterday at the Foreign-office. It was attended by Lord John Russell, the Marquis of Lansdowne, the Earl of Minto, Sir George Grey, Viscount Palmers ton, Earl Grey, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir Francis Baring, Sir John Hobhouse, the Earl of Carlisle, the Right Hon. H. Labouchere, and the Right Hon. Fox Maule. The Council sat one hour. A deputation upon the subject of bonding in Man chester had an interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequer yesterday, at his official residence in Downing-street. The deputation consisted of Mr. Alderman Watkins, Mr. William Gibb, and the town clerk of Manchester ; also the Mayor of Salford, ac companied by the Right HOD. T. M. Gibson, M.P., Mr. Bright, M.P., Messrs. Brown, M.P., Brotherton, M.P., and Kershaw, M.P. Mr. Pete, M.P., had an interview with the Com missioners of Railways yesterday, at their office in the Board of Trade. A deputation, consisting of the Lord Provost of Edinburgh, the Lord Provost of Perth, the ex- Provost of Greenock, the Provost of Montrose, two of the magistrates of Glasgow, Baillie Puller, of Perth ; Bane Watson, of Aberdeen ; Mr. M'cullum, town councillor, of Aberdeen ; Mr. Ness, president of th• Tradesmen's Society of Aberdeen ; Mr. John Hen derson, of Glasgow ; Mr. F. Brown Douglas, of Edin burgh ; Mr. James Balfour, Edinburgh ; Rev. Mr. Graham, of Ayr; Mr. Blair, of Greenock ; Mr. James Watson, of Kelso; Captain Giberne, of Bath; Dr. Greville, of Edinburgh; Mr. Joseph Wilson, hono rary secretary of the Lord's Day Society ; Rev. G. Baylee, colonial secretary of the Lord's Day Society of London, had an interview with Sir George Grey yesterday, at the Home-office, to request that Go vernment oppose any alteration in the late postal arrangements. TO H. R. H. PRINCE ALBERT. THE PETITION OF THE TREES IN HYDE -PARK, ON LEARNING THAT THEY WERE TO BE SACRIFICED TO THE EXHIBITION OF 1851. A thousand years are pass'd away Since we have lived in hi*Cry's page; The world grows grave, and grim, and grey, But ours is still a green old age. Rine, Saxon, Norman, Knight, and Thane Here rowed at early more the chase, And tender maid and sylvan swain Made this at et e their trysting place. Then, Prince, forbear; if hawk, nor hound, Nor love, thy pity can provoke, Yet sympathy may still be found, In British hearts, for "hearts of oak." Our trunks lie rooted in the soil Which bygone generations trod, Our shade refresh'd their fathers' toil, Our heads point upwards to their God. Retraced in yonder Minster grave, By regal hands* cur beauty lives ;t Their " home upon the mountain wave," Their " wooden walls" our bounty gives. When bluff King Harry's iron hand Made bondsmen of our Abbots free,t He seized the ground on which we stand, But wisely spared the old oak tree. He drove the virgin from her cell, The monk from Edward's Minster tower, While we survived to hear his knell, And graced his daughter's regal dower. Then rang again the sylvan glade With echoes of the royal chase, And courtly gallants wooed the shade Which great Eliza deign'd to grace. And when the summer tide came round, The May-pole deck'd our crowded green; For English sports aye most abound Beneath the sceptre of a Queen. Till Cromwell rose, and sports all fled,§ And we were left to mourn alone; — He tore the crown from Charles's head, But axe ne'er touched our sylvan throne. And soon the Merry Monarch came, Our ancient honours to restore; And hound and hawk pursued the game, As in the good old days of yore. Then, Prince, forbear; vouchsafe to spare The trees which sterner Cromwell sold di The crown, of course, he scorn'd to wear, Yet deemed us worth our weight in gold. And when the mart of this world's art Shall leave no vestige of its fame, The greenwood tree will bloom for thee, And bless, for ever, Albert's name! Morning Post. G. F. U. * Westminster AbLev, built by Edward the Confessor in 1050, and rebuilt by * Henry 111., 1250. t " No attentive observer ever viewed a regular aveuu of well-grown trees but it presently put him in mind of the long vista through a Gothic cathedral.' Watburton's Notes on Pope. $ In the time of Henry VIII., Hyde-park formed part of a manor belonging to the abbot and monks of Westminster. In the reign of Queen Elizabeth we read of its " herbage, pannage, and browzewood for deer."— Jesse's London. § Under the rule of the Puritans, the May meetings —the merry sports and festive rejoicings —were declared to be abominable.—Jesse's London. II In the days of the Commonwealth, Hyde-park must have been extremely well wooded, for we find the timber alone valued at 5,0991. 193. 6d., the deer at 7651. --Jesse's London. LORD PALMERSTON ABOUT 1820.—" Lord Pal merston came to town, sera for by Perceval. He was so good as to confide to me that three things were offered to him —the Chancellorship of the Exchequer, Secretaryship at War, or a seat at the Treasury, by way of introduction to the Seals, if he was afraid of entering upon them at once. These offers were, however, in the alternative of there being one of them declined by Milnes (Member for Pontefract), to whom they were made in the first instance. Lord Palmers ton consulted me very frankly upon them, and asked if I thought he would be equal to the seals either in Cabinet or Parliament, particularly the latter, where be bad barely made his debut. I told him, and was most sincere, that in common with all his friends whom I had ever hewaihrnielcp:spieanhtekosfoenceaptle. himself. He r i d, eforward . eter subject, I thought him quite equal to the m o city, but as to nerves in Parliamentb( most to doubt) nobody could jadge u Petty (whom I had mentioned) had co o m f having felt his way and got possession himself in the House, and that if he bad done the same, he perhaps would not hesitate. As it was he inclined to the second place, but had written to Lord Malmesbury. We walked up to Hyde-park discussing the subject. Among other topics which I urged, one seemed to impress him much; which was, the great difference there would be in his situation and pretensions upon a return to office, in the event of our going out, if he retired as a Cabinet Minister, instead of a subordinate capacity. He allowed it much flattered his ambition, but feared the prejudice that it would occasion to his own reputation and the interest of his friends if he failed. I left him inclining to the Secretary at War, and admired his prudence, as I have long done the talents sad excellent understanding, as well as the many other goo d qualities as well as accomplishments, of this very fine young Memoir of R. Plume? Ward. CHESTER AND HOLYHEAD RALLWAL—Traffic for the Week ended June 30, 1850 C. and 11 . Main 2,9571. 41a. 10d. ; Mold, 1061. 6a. Id. ; Steam-boats, 2614 56. 84, ; Total, SAUL 161. 7d.