The Sun. — London, England, 1845-03-11 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, March 10. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at Five o'clock. SALE OF SPIRITS ON SUNDAYS. The Bishop of LONDON presented seventy peti tions from various parts of the country, praying the House to prevent the sale of ardent spirits on the Lord's-day. The Right Rev. Prelate said, that al though he could not go the whole length with the petitioners, he would observe that the clause intro duced into the Metropolitan Police Act, prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors after a certain hour on Sundays, had had an extraordinary and gratifying effect in improving public morals, so that there was a very great diminution in the number of charges at the police offices on Mondays. A similar clause, intro duced into the Liverpool Police Bill at his (the Bishop of London's) suggestion, had also been attended with the most happy results in that great town. This he had upon the authority of one of the magis trates, who assured him that the people of Liverpool could never be sufficiently grateful to their Lordships for so great an improvement. He thought that the provision ought to be extended to other large towns, and that so far their Lordships might comply with the prayer of the petitioners. FEMALE PROTECTION. The RIGHT Rev. PRELATE also presented a petition from the clergy and other persons in the town of Uxbridge on the subject which had been brought under their Lordships' notice last session by a Right Rev. Prelate, in order to put down those houses which were used for the seduction of females, and who were desirous of protecting females from the evils to which they were exposed. AGRICULTURAL PROTECTION. The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a peti tion from Basingstoke in favour of agricultural pro tection. IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. Lord BROUGHAM presented petitions from the Ayr Stewatry in the county of Kircudbright, and from another place in Scotland, on the subject of im prisonment for del. t, as regulated by the Act of last session. The NOBLE LORD also presented a petition from certain gentlemen, attorneys at Oswestry, who were entitled to practise in the Courts of Westminster, and who from their position as masters extraordinary in Chancery were authorised to take oaths. The petitioners, their Lordships were aware, were highly respectable individuals, and from their peculiar position their experience was highly valuable. They stated that it was their impression that if the Act of the Lord-Lieutenant for Sussex had been acted upon it would greatly have tended to prevent the commission of perjury, which was fre quently occasioned by the necessity for taking so many oaths in the courts of law and justice. REMEDY FOR CREDITORS. The NOBLE LORD also presented a petition from the city of Bath, praying that after all the necessary immunity had beets given to the creditor, that ad ditional means might be given to the creditor for re covering his claims from fraudulent debtors. The Act of last session touched all the goods but did not in many instances touch the incomes of debtors. Creditors could not seize the rents of their debtors, neither could they touch their salaries. If therefore a man had a salary of 2001. he might go to several tradesmen and contract debts of 19/. and up to 201. each, and then laugh at his creditors. He (Lord Brougham) would remedy this defect. OTAHEITE. The Earl of MINTO said, that in consequence of the indisposition of his Noble Friend, the First Lord of the Admiralty, and his consequent kability to ap pear in his place, he would postpone the notice of motion of which he had given notice with respect to her Majesty's ships Hazard and Basilisk at the islands of Otaheite from this day till Friday. He would take that oppor tunity of saying, that though he perfectly agreed with the expressions of the Noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington) the other evening respecting the courtesy of the House ; yet he thought the Noble puke had gone too far in that motion, anl that his Noble Friend (the Marquis of Normanby) was right in the course he intended to pursue. Lord BROUGHAM said the Noble Earl had pro fessed to be a great patron of order, and yet he had began wi'h one of the Most irregular things that could poss . bly have occurred. The Earl of MINTO said he would not trouble their Lordships further than to express his opinion that a notice was only necessary in cases where opposition might be expected. In other cases, he thought it was still left discretionary with the party putting the question to give notice or not. The Duke of WELLINGTON admitted the ex ception, and the matter dropped. JEWISH DISABILITIES BILL. Lord MONTEAGLE presented a petition in favour of the Bill. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, in moving the second reading of the Bill referred to by the petition just presented by his Noble Friend—as he did not anticipate any effective opposition to the measure—he should confine himself to stating very shortly the motives and intention of the Bill. Th e o bj ec t w a s t o get rid of the disabilities, some anomalies, some inconsistencies, and, he might be permitted to say, some absurdities, which pressed upon •persons pro fessing the Jewish persuasion. In order that he might be fully understood upon the subject, he should begin by shortly calling. their Lordships' attention to the position in which persons entertaining the Jewish religion stood with respect to offices held under the Crown. There was no objection to these persons being placed in the commission of the peace for a county, and many of them at present held theim portant and responsible office of county magistrates. There were recent instances of these appointments to offices of this description. Sir Moses Montefiore, who was at present a justice of peace for the Cinque Ports, and also was a magistrate for Kent, had, within a shorrperiod, had his name recommended by the Lord-Lieutenant to be placed in the commission of the peace for the county of Middlesex. But this was not a solitary instance. Mr. Salomon, several years ago, was placed in the commission of the peace for the county of Sussex, and had since been placed in the commission of the peace for the county of Kent. Mr. Lizardi and Mr. Cowen, two other gen tlemen of the Jewish persuasion, were also magis trates for the county of Sussex, and he had never heard any complaint made of those appointment=, nor had he ever heard that any of these gentlemen had misconducted themselves in the discharge of their magisterial duties. On the contrary, he believed that they had conducted themselves with the greatest propriety. Nur was it merely to the commission of the peace they were confined, they held also the office of Deputy- Lieutenant in different counties. Mr. Salomons was a Deputy-Lieutenant ; so was also one of the Messrs. Rothschilds—nay, more, they were so by Parlia mentary sanction and authority. They were eligible to the office of High Sheriff. They were not only eligible, but they were bound, when appointed, to discharge the duties; and if they refused to accept the office, according to the charter of the city of Lon don, they were subject to a heavy pecuniary esalty. That was the position of persons belonging to the Jewish persuasion with la spect to many high and pre-eminent offices in this country. They all knew that the office of sheriff was a stepping-stone and passport to the office of alderman of the city of Landon. A person who conducted himself with pro priety in the office of sheriff, and discharged the duties to the satisfaction of the citizens of London, so as to earn their regard and esteem, thus would have great influence and effect when the office of alderman became vacant, and that person appeared and offered himself as a candidate. When a responsible and burdensome office was imposed upon any man, which led to others as the rewards of that labour and re sponsibility, and their Lordships compel him to fulfil the preliminary office, and to discharge the burden some duties, while they excluded him from the higher and lucrative office, which was its usual reward— (Hear, hear) —nothing could be more unjust than such a proceeding—nothing mere impolitic and un wise than to withhold rewards fur the discharge of duties in a laborious and responsible office. That was not only unjust and impolitic, but the manner in which it was effected was vexatious. A gentle man in the office of sheriff gained the esteem and ap probation of his fellow-citizens, and was unanimously elected Alderman. He went to the Mayor and Alder men to be admitted. He offered to take the oaths, but the ansx er was, " there is, in addition to these, a declaration prescribed by the 9th Geo. IV., which You will have to take first." That declaration was, that the person elected would not use the influence, power, or authority o f hi s o ff ice to i n j ure t h e P rotestant re ligion or the Protestant Church of this country. All this the person elected was willing to declare, but he was told that h e must subscribe the declaration in the true faith of a Ch r i st i an. That he could not consci entiously subscribe. If it were necessary to exclude the Jews, let it be do ne b y d i rect legislation. Here was an individual, a county magistrate, a deput y - lieutenant, capable of b e i ng e l ected and bound to serve the office of the Sheriff of London, educated in the City, brought up in 'commercial pursuits, and intimately acquainted with the trade and local interests of London. Would their Lords ips pass a Bill to exclude such a man from the office of Alderman, and if not, they ought not to do so by the circuitous means now adopted. Per haps their Lordships were not acquainted with th e nice distinctions upon this subject. These distinc tions were the subject of inquiry in the Court of Queen's Bench, where a Noble Lord near him de cided that it was the duty of the Court of Alder men to admit him upon his taking the oaths , leaving it to himself to sign the declaration when he thought fit : but if he neglected to do so, he was protected by the Act of Indemnity. That decision was reversed by a writ of error, in the Court of Exchequer, which ruled that the declaration shotfid be taken at the time of presenting himself, and that the Mayor, and Court of Aldermen had the right to prescribe the order in which the oaths and the declarations should be taken. The result was, that the Court of Aldermen, who had no voice in the election, might, by prescribing the declaration in the first instance, exclude the person elected, and place an officer favoured by them, but not elected by the citizens, thus giving the aldermen control over the elections in which they had no con cern. That was not the case in other towns in Eng land. In Birmingham the oaths were taken first, and if the declaration were not signed afterwards, the neglect was protected by the Act of Indemnity. Thus it was in Birmingham, Portsmouth, Southamp ton, and other places. His object was to get rid of these anomalies, and to place the matter on a clear and distinct footing. The mode which he proposed was well known to their Lordships. It was when the declaration was about to be taken by a person of a Jewish persuasion, that the words "in the true faith of a Christian" should be omitted. They had done this in the case of Quakers, Moravians, Inde pendents, and others, who had scruples of conscience against that form. He might he told that the object of the words was to exclude Jews, but he had a case in favour of this view, in times less liberal than the present, when people saw dangers that were not now apprehended, and were disposed to be more chime rical. In the 10th year of George 1., the same words were omitted in favour of the Jews from the declara tion prescribed by the Abjuration Act. In the Act, the 14th of George 11., the same exception in favour of the Jews was made. He thought it right to rest his case on these limited grounds, lest the particular hardship might be lost sight of, if he went into a wider discussion of principles. He would not go into details of what was done in other countries—in France, in Belgium, in the United States of America, and, above all, in Holland—(Hear, hear)—where, without any distinction, for a great number of years, Jews had been admitted into the highest offices with out any inconvenience, and to the satisfaction of all enlightened minds. In the Austrian States a great improvement was proceeding;. but Prussia was taking the lead of liberality to the Jews. Jews were ad mitted to the schools and universities, and several of them attained the highest distinctions in the learned professions. (The Noble Lord then read a document l i to the effect that the Jews in the Prussian universities and the learned professions in Prussia, distinguished for learning and genius, were considerably more than in the proportion of their numbers to the other race.) There was nothing that he more regretted than the degradation of this class; and their Lordships had always expressed a sympathy for the disabilities to which they were exposed. And under these circum stances he did hope that their Lordships would pass the Bill which he now submitted to their attention.— (Hear, hear.) He thought it unnecessary to enter on any lengthened review of the Acts which related to the hardships and disabilities to which members of the Jewish persuasion were exposed ; and he thought that the time was come when all the obsolete Acts by which these disabilties were imposed should be swept from the statute book. He need only refer to one of those similar Acts which had been imposed in former times—he meant that of Edward I.—by which members of the Jewish persuasion were not only confined to par ticular town 9, but to particular districts of those towns, called " .Tewries," and by which they were obliged to affix certain badges to their outer garments, which ex pressed their religious opinions and callings. This, he thought, was a sufficient review to justify the House in sweeping those acts from the statute book. The Bishop of LONDON said that he had but one observation to make on this Bill. He should not now oppose it, for he knew that would only bring on a use less discussion ; but he would beg their Lordships to observe that by this silent acquiescence in the second reading he by no means precluded himself from opposing it in a future state. He would not pledge himself to any particular line of conduct with regsrd to the Bill. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that he was not at all surprised at the declaration just made by the Right Rev. Prelate, but he nevertheless rejoiced at the introduction of this Bill, and he trusted that the time was not far distant when all disabilities would be re moved from the members of the Jewish persuasion. He could not help congratulating the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack on the perfect consistency of his conduct on this occasion. He (the Marquis of Lans downe) recollected that five years ago the Noble and Learned Lord had presented a petition from Mr. Salo mons, for the very privilege which this Bill was about to confer, and he would therefore congratulate the House on the progress of liberal opinions, and hoped they would find encouragement in the wise course they had now adopted. His firm impression was, that the time was not far distant when a full consideration of this sub ject would be called for, and when that House would be compelled to do justice to a class of men than whom none were more respectable ; and that without in the least inconveniencing the public interests of the country. What could be more injurious to the public interests, what more unjust to the individuals themselves, than that while respectable men of the Jewish persuasion should be admitted to the magistracy in counties, they should be excluded in corporations? What more ridi culous than that they were fit for the office of Sheriff and Justice of the Peace, and yet be incompetent to fill the office of Alderman of the city of London? He cor dially supported the Bill brought in by the Noble and Learned Lord upon the Woolsack. Lord BROUGHAM said he entirely concurred in the opinions that had fallen from the Noble Lord who had just spoken, and he hoped that the measure brought in by his Noble and Learned Friend upon the Wool sack would be passed without one voice being raised against it. While he thought that no long time would elapse ere further concessions were made to the Jews, he yet thought that the limited Bill of his Noble and Learned Friend was more politic and more expedient than a more extended measure would be at that time. It was certainly a most ridiculous anomaly that members of the Jewish persuasion should be empowered to act as ministers of justice in counties, and be denied the same privileges—he would not call them privileges, he would say rights—in corporations. It would be most ungrate ful in him—it would be most unjust to his fellow la bourers in the city of London—if he did not take the opportunity of recording the great, the charitable, the generous, the magnificent aid rendered by the gentlemen of the Jewish persuasion to all sects a nd a ll c l asses, t h e i r enlightened industry in promoting wise and useful ob jects, without regard to creed or sec t, an d t h e rea di ness with which they aided, w ith p urse an d h an d , any scheme which was calculated to advance the interests of their fellow-subjects. Lord CAMPBELL adverted to the Bill brought in in 1810, to remove the disabilities that pressed upon the Jews. That Bill was rejected by a large majority in that House. When be had the honour, in 1831, of being Attorney-General he, in the case of Mr. Salomons, re ferred to by the Noble Lord, brought in a Bill to re move those disabilities, but only in the single instance of sheriff; and that Bill was founded upon the analogy that existed between the duties of sheriffs in counties and sheriffs in corporations, and that as the former were not required to make the declaration, so ought not the latter. He was exceedingly glad that a change had been made, and he hoped tha' in the next session of Parliament the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsa k would come down to the House with a Bill which would enable a person of the Jewish persuasion not only to sit in the Court of Aldermen of the City of London, but to a seat in the Legislature of the country. The Bishop of LONDON would offer no opposition to the Bill because he did not wish to promote discussion, but he begged it to be understood that the Bill was not to be taken as an instalment of future concessions. Lord COLCHESTER said the speech of the Noble and Learned Lord opposite (Lord Campbell) had almost persuaded him to oppose the measure, but it nevertheless was not his intention to do so. But in assenting to the Bill it must be understood that he did not for a moment . . . . think it right and proper that persons of the Jewish per suasion should ever hold a seat in Parliament. Lord RE] ESDALE said it had been stated that there was a similarity between this measure and a Bill introduced in 1841; but this was strictly not the case. There might be a similarity in the two preambles, but in any other respect there certainly was none. After a few words of explanation from Lord CAMP BELL, which did not reach the gallery, The LORD CHANCELLOR said the Bill of 1841 related to municipal corporations, and no doubt this had induced his Noble and Learned Friend to assume that there was a similarity between the two. The Noble and Learned Lord had certainly opposed the measure in a circuitous mode, and it appeared to him, from what had fallen from a Noble Lord on the Ministerial side of the House that this circuitous opposition had nearly proved successful.—(Laughter.) The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed. LUNATICS IN IRELAND. Lord MONTEAGLE brought in a Bill fur amending the law respecting pauper lunatics in Ireland. The Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be read again this day week. The Earl of CADOGAN moved for returns of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, showing in what parishes there had been a surplus of the funds applicable for the purposes of the Commissioners, and in what way such surplus funds had been applied. The Bishop of LONDON said that he had no ohjec Lion to produce the returns called for by the Noble Earl, but he trusted he would modify his motion so as to ob viate a great inconvenience, for part of the returns which the Noble Earl des•red had been included in other icturns already presented to their Lordships' House. If all the returns which had been moved for were presented the production of them would cause an immohe trouble to the clerks, whereas, if the motion were modified, all • this would be avoided. Ile (the Bishop of London) had not the slightest objection to give every information, and produce all the correspondence in the possession of the Commissioners, and he would, therefore, suggest that the Noble Earl should move for the first of the returns. The Earl of CADOGAN said that he acted simply on public grounds, and that he wished to know how the funds of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners had been ad- ministered, and where there had been a surplus. If the Right Rev. Prelate would give the returns of those parishes where a surplus had been found, and how that surplus had been administered, that was all he required. Lord LYNDHURST suggested that the Noble Earl should modify his motion. The Earl of CADOGAN said that he would modify his motion, and would be prepared to say in what way he would put it to•morrow. CONSTABLES (SCOTLAND) BILL AMEND MENT. On the motion of the Duke of BUCCLEIICIL thi s Bill was read a third time and passed.—Adjourned. THE SUN, LONi3O DOUSE OF COMMONS, March 10. The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four. On the motion of Mr. BROTHERTON, the Man chester and Salford Waterworks Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. On the motion of Mr. BUSFEILD, the Bradford Gas Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. Mr. F. FRENCH presented a petition in favour of the Irish Great Western Railway Bill, which was referred to the Committee on the standing orders. The Ulster Railway Extension Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. The Forth and Clyde Navigation Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. The Lynn and Ely Railway Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. The Scottish Central Railway Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. The Cambridge and Lincoln Railway Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. The Southampton Docks Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be eommitted. Mr. V. STUART brought in the London and Westminster Cemetery Bill, w hich was read a Srst, and ordered to be read a second time to-morrow. The York and North Midland (Goole) Branch Railway Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed to-morrow. INCOME-TAX. Sir J. DUKE presented a petition from the borough of Boston, praying that all trades and professions might be exempt from the income-tax. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. Mr. H. HALFORD presented a petition from the Agricultural Association of the county of Leicester, complaining of the extreme agricultural distress, and praying the House to take steps to remove it. POST• OFFICE. Mr. S. CRAWFORD presented a petition from a gentleman in Montgomeryshire, named Robert Black stone, complaining of a practice existing amongst pro vincial post-masters of detaining newspapers, and praying the House to adopt some stringent measures for remedying the evil. MAYNOOTH. Mr. FOX MAULE presented a petition against any further grant to Maynooth. Mr. ARKWRIGHT presented a- petition from a number of landholders, praying that if any parties were relieved from the income-tax, the claims of landholders generally might not be forgotten. Mr. BROTHERTON presented a number of petitions, praying the House to take steps to prevent the sale of intoxicating drinks on Sundays. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. Mr. G. BANKES presented a petition from the occupiers of land in Dorchester, praying the House to remove some of the burdens which pressed upon them. RAILWAYS. The following Railway Bills were severally read a second time, and ordered to be committed :—The Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway, the Oxford and Rugby Railway, the Newcastle and Berwick Railway, the West Cornwall Railway, the Eastern Counties (Cambridge and Huntingdon) Railway. Mr. EWART presented a petition in favour of the Glasgow and Dumfries Railway. Mr. MAUNSELL presented four petitions from the county of Northampton, complaining of agricul tural distress, and praying for relief. Lord HARRY VANE presented a petition from the Anti-Slavery Society of Derby, against the im portation of hill-coolies into the West Indian colonies. Mr. GEO. BANKES presented a petition against the Southampton and Dorchester Railway, which was referred to the Committee on standing orders. IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBTS UNDER 201. Mr. F. BERKELEY gave notice that he should, on a future day, move for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal the Act of last session, for abolishing imprison ment for debts under 201., with a view to adopt a better mode for recovering debts under that amount, and saving tradesmen from the loss to which they are liable from the imposition of fraudulent debts. THE FALKLAND ISLANDS. Dr. BOWRING gave notice that he should, to morrow, move for returns of the amount of the Par liamentary grants to the Falkland Islands, and the amount of the custom-house returns of those islands. IN COME-TAX. Lord EBRINGTON said that, seeing the income tax was sure to continue for three years, 's ould pro bably continue for five years, and might possibly continue for ever, begged to ask the Hon. Baronet, the Member for the University of Oxford, whether he intended to put his motion for levying the income tax on those incomes which were not less than 1511. ? Sir R. INGLIS said that he certainly intended to bring on the motion of which he had given notice ; he wished he could say with the hope that it might be levied on all incomes betweenlso/. and 2001. only, on the difference between those sums, namely, on 501. , TUESDAY MORNING, MARCh 11, 1845. one who was sanguine enough to go with the Govern ment in that statement. They must look upon this, therefore, as the sole experiment which they had to try with the revenue, they must regard this as the solegain which they were to have for the surplus. They were to get the remission which the Right Hon. Baronet proposed to make, and for that they were to have the income-tax for ever. The question, therefore, which the House had to decide was—whether they would take the income-tax for ever, and receive, in satisfaction, the reduction of taxes which the Right Honourable Baroaet proposed to make. He must confess that he did not think that anything that had been offered could reconcile him to the con tinuance of the income-tax.—(Hear, hear.) It had been said that this was eminently a poor man's budget. Now, he ha-I always observed that when the Govern ment did not know what to say in support of any measure which they might have happened to propose, they invariably said that it was for the benefit of the poor man, and some Hon. Gentlemen on that side of the House had been allured by the cry that this budget was for the benefit of the poor man. Now he (Mr. C. Buller) could not see how they could have by any possibility reduced an equal amount of taxation on any articles which would have conferred so little benefit on the poor man.—(Hear, hear.) First there was the sugar tax. Now, they were all agreed on that (the Opposition) side of the House, that they could not have reduced any tax with such little advantage to the in terests of everybody except the West India proprietors. He believed that there was not anybody on that side of the House, always excepting the Hon. Member for Dumfries, who was so en amoured of the income-tax that he would rather see the proceeds thrown into the sea than not have it —with the exception of the Hon. Member for Dum fries, there was not one Gentleman on that side of the House who would consent to the continuance of the income- tax for the sake of the reduction in the sugar duty.—(Hear.) Was it the auction duty the reduction of which was to benefit the poor man ?—(Hear.) Was he to gain by the removal of the tax upon exports? —(Hear, hear.) He must confess that it seemed to him that the export duty was paid by foreigners. He did not think the poor man could gain much by its reduction. But then there were the 420 articles of the tariff. Now, he had looked at them all, and he could not conceive what the poor man was to gain from the reduction in them. The Right Hon. Baronet would not give the poor man corn.—(Cheers.) He would not give him butter—(Cheers)—but he would give him alum to adulterate his bread—(Cheers and laughter)—and lard to adulterate his butter.—(Renewed cheers and laughter) Now he did not know, unless it was per haps upon such articles as Divi Divi and Albanalla, on what it was the poor man was to gain. It was true he had never before heard of those articles, and he had no very longing desire to hear an explanation as to their qualities.—(A laugh.) Then there was glass. Now he believed the poor man would benefit more by the reduction of the duty on glass than upon that of any other article ; not that he believed he would get it much cheaper, but he would have a better article for his money. Then there was sugar—then there was cotton. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had burst forth eloquently on the advantages which the poor man would derive from cheap fustians ; and the First Lord of the Treasury had dilated at length upon the advantages which the poor woman would derive from a cheap cotton gown. Now he (Mr. C. Buller) never treated of millions ; he left those to the First Lord of the Treasury and the Chancellor of the Exchequer; but when they came to pence he could calculate. Now, let them imagine a poor man, dressed from top to toe in fustian that is to say, with a fustian coat, a fustian waistcoat, and fustian trousers— Now let them consider this subject scientiically—let them come to weights and measures. lie had made numerous inquiries, and had taken great pains to as certain, and he had come to the conclusion that at the outside the weight of this dress would be four and a half pounds.—(Roars of laughter, occasioned by the admirable mode in which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman imitated the manner in which the Premier usually makes his statistical statements.) He had been told that he must make an allowance of an additional half pound for waste. That would give five pounds as the quantity of raw cotton em ployed in the manufacture of the suit of fustian. The duty on raw cotton was five-sixteenths of a penny per pound ; therefore the poor man would save, on the suit, twenty-five•sixteenths of a penny, or one penny and nine - sixteenths. He then took the case of a woman's gown.—(Laugh ter.) Into that he had also made inquiry. —(Much laughter.) He made allowance for waste, and he found that the reduction in a woman's cotton gown would be about td. Supposing a woman, there fore, to have two gowns a year, her husband would save lid. a year. The two, the husband and wife, would have to be grateful to the Chan cellor of the Exchequer for a saving of 3d. a year. His (Mr. Buller's) own belief was that they would never get their 3d., for he be lieved that the poor consumer would never have a chance of getting jacket, waistcoat, and trowsers, which cost altogether 13s. or 145., even though they reduced the cost of the articles by I kd. W hy, the poor man, although he might save 3d. a year, vet he would have to pay 3d. a month, in the shape Of - taxes, to the West India proprietors. There could be no doubt that reducing the duty on raw cotton would be useful to the poor man, as the means of increasing his em ployment. In the reduction of the duty on glass, the most important effect would be the sweeping awisy of the restrictive system in the excise laws. He was, however, inclined to think that the Right Hon. Ba ronet would have done a great deal of service to the labouring classes of the country by diminishing the taxes which raised the cost of the necessaries of life. And this could not be done without increasing their employments. He did not believe that they could serve the cotton trade more effectually by sweeping away the tax upon raw cotton, than they would by sweeping away of the taxes on tea, as that would enable the merchant o get a return from China. He. could point 0 one or two other duties, as most material for such an experiment. He was sure that Hon. Gentlemen would not agree with him in saying that the wine duties and the spirit duties liter e proper subjects for reduction ; but every body would agree with him that it would be well if by reducing those duties they could largely increase our trade with France, and es tablish commercial relations instead of those of rivalry and hostility.—(Cries of " Hear.") He thought that by reducing those duties they would do double good to the poor man, by diminishing the cost of living, and also increasing his employment by forwarding trade with foreign markets.--(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet held out the expectation that the reduction of duties was so great, that they would make up the income• tax. Now that was the oddest delusion that so sensible a gentleman could well fall into.—(Laughter.) But the very same thing was said when the Right Hon. Baronet brought forward the budget of 1842. (Hear.) He (Mr. Buller) asked every person whom he met what he thought about the reduction. He said that the Right Hon. Baronet was the greatest Minister they ever had (of course those to whom he said this did not know who he was)—that be lowered everything, but he could never get a single person to agree with him. For what did any man gain by the reduction, except, perhaps, in Westphalia hams.—(Hear, hear, from a Member on the Ministe rial side of the House.) He was not surprised that the Hon. Gentleman expressed his suffering at the dimi nished price.—(A laugh.) He fully understood his ex clamation.--(Laughter.) He dared say the Honour able Member suffered much in that article.—(ln creased laughter.) But though that might not be well for those who lived in the country, it was good for those who lived in towns. He was about to go through the article of sugar. He would take an in stance of a man having 5001. a year. A person of that income would have to pay 13/. 14s. 4d. income-tax. That was positive, and there was no mistake about it; and'if the same person consumed 401. worth of sugar, taking it that he would save a penny a pound (though he did not believe he would), he would save twenty five shillings ; so there was twenty-five shillings as a set-off against 131. 14s. 4d.--(Hear, hear.) But then there were other articles on which he might make up the tax. There was physic.—(A laugh.) He himself once thought he would make it up in physic.—(Much laughter.) He supposed it was the reduction on physic that made the Honourable Gentleman below him (Mr. Wakley) so pleased with the budget.—(Great laughter.) But even in this article he believed the druggists would save everything, and that the consumer would gain nothing.—(Laughter.) There was certainly a very good change with regard to furni ture, and if all the inhabitants of the country were composed of new married couples of a 1,0001. a year, they might make something in the articles of furniture and glass. (Great laughter.) But, after all, to think of giving up this tax put him very much in mind of an incident in the opera of II Nozzi di Figaro, or " The Marriage of Figaro," as it was called, in which the principal character said he was ready to consent, provided there was no law against politics, no enactment against certain prin ciples, and no prohibition to the full en joyment of the inclinations of the law.—(A laugh.) So it was with the Right Honourable Baronet at the head of her Majesty's G-overn ment.—(Laughter.) He said, " You shall have a reduction of taxes so and so, provided you do not ask me to take the duty off tobacco; to take the duty off coffee ; to take the duty off sugar"--(Laughter)—in fact, the Right Honour able Baronet was quite willing to make any concession that was asked of him, provided that he was not called upon to do that which the people of this country were likely to be most benefited by.—(Hear, hear.) Oh ! but then the Right Hon. Baronet took the duty off pigs' bristles —(A laugh)—and off lard—(A laugh)—and off all those other twopenny-halfpenny articles—(A laugh) —but he forgot that, in doing so, he still kept on the most important restrictions on other articles ; and he said very coolly to those opposed to him, that they could not have their loaf and eat it— (Laughter)—that they could not, in fact, deal in butter, deal in cheese, deal in corn, and deal in every other description of foreign previsions, without pay ing a certain proportion towards the two millions of extra taxes.—(Great laughter.) But the Right Hon. Baronet conceived that by removing the duty upon glass, and the duty upon cotton, he would be doing much to abolishing this cause of warfare against the taxes, and he had hoped it would be re garded as a boon by the people of this country. And what did they gain by bowing so implicitly to the will of the Right Hon. Baronet ? What did they gain by it ? Why, their great object was placed further than ever from them, and, in fact, they were playing into the hands of the monopolists. While they talked of free-trade as their first great object, and while they dealt out their "total and immediate" anathemas against all those who differed from them, they were actually playing the game of the monopolists by voting for an income-tax which bolstered up the differential duties. Let them look at this one question —what was the chance of their ever recovering this surplus ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer seemed to take this as a matter of course. Now he had had the pleasure of sitting in that House with that Right Hon. Gentleman for fifteen years, and slowly and with difficulty had the very elements of these truths been forced on his mind. In every budget he had seen him introduce he had heard him urge the danger of lowering taxation for the purpose of increasing the revenue. But when the Right Hon. Gentleman did go into a good principle he must say he went, with a plunge, head over heels—(Laughter) —he was now not only lowering taxes to increase the revenue, but altogether abolishing them—. (Great laughter.) He did not deny that a revenue might thus be increased, if the people were induced, by the abolition of these duties, to con sume more of the articles which still paid taxation. But, on the other hand, there was a danger of diminishing the revenue, by the consumption of the people being withdrawn from the tax-paying articles, by their substi tuting articles, that no longer paid duty, for them. Thus the abolition of the duty on glass might induce the people to purchase and employ glass in many cases, in stead of articles which would still pay duty. But he had a still greater objection to dealing with the revenue in this manner, because all their calcalations were based on favourable years—years in which the Customs and Ex cise had been recovering, from an increase in the pros perity of the country. NA hen they alluded to the failures of the Whig Chancellor of the Exchequer, and had had their taunt and their sneer, let them then talk of the matter like men of sense, and then would they not see, that whatever bad been the faults of the Whig Chancellor of the Exchequer, the great cause of their deficiency was the three or four bad harvests. And what was it revived their trade? The tariff or the other measures of the Government ? Why the revenue had not revived on the articles the tariff touched. By the increased consumption of the people, by good har vests, and by a revived American trade, the country had improved. Was the Right Hon. Gentleman prepared for a different state of circumstances? Good harvests, he repeated, and an uninterrupted trade, had improved The condition of the people. But what would be the core equence if those disasters should occur within the next three years which had often occurred before, and which, in the nature of things, must occur again? What would the Right Hon. Gentleman say in 1848, when introducing his budget, if there had been some bad har vests and a declining trade in the interim? Would he recommend them to do away with the income-tax? He would tell them what was much more likely—the Right Hon. Baronet would come forward in 1848 with a deficit in spite of the income-•tax—(Hear, hear)—and ask the House to increase the income-tax or provide some other way for meeting the deficiency.—(Hear, hear.) It was fraudulent and delusive to tell the country that the in come-tax would be only continued for three years longer. He would tell them fairly that such a state of things could not occur. But Honourable Gentlemen seemed disposed to place great confidence in the Right Honourable Baronet, so much so, that in con sideration of the abolition of the auction duties, the diminution of the cotton duty, and the alteration in the sugar duties, they were willing to bear the income tax for three years longer. As honest and plain dealing men, they could have no doubt but the income-tax would be permanent, and, therefore, they ought to put it in that shape in which it would be least oppressive. He was not now going to mention his objections to the income-tax in detail. He had done so on a former oc casion, and he now would say that his objections had been all verified by the operation of this tax. He thought they were fully justified in complaining of the operation of the income-tax. It had pressed with great and un equal severity. It did not regard degree, but bore with the same weight on the man of immense wealth and pa trimony as the man of fluctuating and uncertain income. Besides, it gave great opportunities for fraud, and the honest man was obliged to pay for the fraudulent eva sion of the dishonest one. He admitted that in London the collection of the income-tax was not attended with so much severity as in the country; but in some parts of England—the north, for, instance—he daily heard loud complaints of the conduct of the Commissioners, who, it was said, pressed with the greatest stringency on per sons of obnoxious politics and rivals in trade. His amendment did not extend to any specific alteration of the tax. He put forward a plain practical principle, and did not wish to embarrass and confuse it with any unnecessary details. Every amendment that could be proposed upon the tax, might fellow when his amendment was carried. He confessed that he had before shaped that amendment for the purpose of giving an opportunity for other amend ments being proposed.—(Hear, hear.) That was his object, because he believed the tax required many alter ations, and that this rude and primitive alteration could not be made decently in the nineteenth century without great care and amendment. The Right Hon. Baronet had said that if they once began amendments, so many would be proposed that they would not be able to get through with them before the sth of April. What, be would ask, was the sth of April compared with the placing of a tax of a most oppressive nature on a proper footing ?—(Hear, hear.) Then the Right Hon. Baronet said, let them pass the income-tax now, just as it was, and if they did not like it at the end of three years, then let them amend it again. Now what he said was this, that if at the end of three years they must amend it, why not amend it now ?—(Hear.) Why let the evil remain for three years longer.—(Hear, hear.) If a person's shoe pinched him, he thought any one would say he was a fool if he did not take it off directly, and not let it remain for three years more. That was just what he wanted with the income-tax. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that if his (Mr. Buller's) motion was carried, he would be obliged to give up a portion of the reduction he had proposed in taxation ; in answer to that, he had only to say that there was not any tax the Right Hon. Gentleman proposed to remit, that operated so heavily on the people as the present income-tax. The Hon. Gentleman concluled by moving the amendment of which he had given notice :—" That the circumstances under which the renewal of the income-tax is at present proposed, are such as to render it exceedingly impro bable that Parliament will have the power of dispensing with its continuance at the eud of three years ; and that it is therefore the duty of this House to take care that the tax be imposed in a form in which its operation shall he less unequal and inquisitorial than it now is." Mr. EWART seconded the amendment, and the ques tion having teen put by the Speaker, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the Hon. Gentleman who had just concluded began his speech by remarking that he had in the discussions on the income-tax observed a degree of languor which was unbecoming in the representatives of the people ; and as if determined to relieve the dullness of which he com plained he had indulged in a series of remarks, which, if not sound in argument, were at least entertaining to those who had heard them. If there had been general acquiescence in the proposals of his Right Hon. Friend it was attributable not to argument or consideration on the part of Hon. Members, but to a general conviction that, in the circumstances of the case, the reimposition of the income-tax was a measure which well deserved minute detail as to the quantity of cotton conseteellt:a dress, and the benefit which the p o oor man woul d ec ss , from the reduction of the duty, but did not the of Gentleman see that if he pursued that course with , e 4;. other tax he would find that the amount of be lit tle Jived from it s re d uc ti on b y eac h i n di v idual ° community would be but small. Let him nurr e hnl own calculations with reg ar d t o t h e 2 s . a pours a w ou ld he proposed t o t a k e o ff t o b acco, an d ca l cu l ate what 401 be the saving which would accrue to the poor man - „ t es the tobacco which he was compelled to c° s 6o Then, with regard to the higher orders, the 1 1 °° o fr tleman complained th a t th e y wou ld d er i ve from °lot ductions no sufficient compensation for the inenno which they were compelled t o p a y. B u t did the 0 to. Gentleman think that the r e d uct i on o f the duty ° , e ti• bacco would give them th a t com p ensat i on ? to dent that they could not by any reductions make - ,',eto the higher orders for the c o nt r ib u ti on w hich they fist forced to pay to the income-tax.—(Hear, hear' ) did there was one thing certain, that the income-tell/0 not operate directly upon the lower classes ; and 1 , 1 0 for the llon. Gentlem a n to ex pl a i n w h e ther the lu so orders did not derive benefit from a tax which V itiS r ti imposed as to nine 5,000,000 annually from the k i nt of the better class of s oc i e t ) .—(H ear , hear.) 1 " ° Ott his Right Hun. Friend h a d come d own to Parliartio and proposed the reductio n o f th ose t w o duties ou the Hon. Gentleman seemed so highly to favour--'O. Mr. C. BULLER had tnentionea five or six lies e l . r e I had mentioned tea, coffe e , sugar , t o b acco , and IP A re. and what he had meant to sa y was , t h a t if they °T; t tet duced any of these, they would have taken a course than that which they had taken. hid sr The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER woo derstood the Hon. Gentleman to insist particntotro the reduction of the duty on tobacco and spirio• he thought that if his Right Hon. Friend had Pr o die to Parliament no devote the surplus of 3,000,0004 'OOO. reduction of the duty oh tobacco and spirits, th e have Gentleman would himself have been the first M oo n raised an outcry against such a proposition. I le so bjelt have told them that these were not the articles to 00 1(1 a reduction of duty ought t o h ave b een made. v ices have complained that they were pandering to the f or t* of the people, instead of ministering to their c oll3 base and the Hon. Gentleman would, in such a case' more reason for his complaints than he had at P ies s 011 He admitted that in selecting the diff erent a rticie wer s which a reduction of duty was to be made t he l e oefil bound to see from which the g r ea t es t a mount of mos s could be obtained. He would no t deny the correc t hat of the principle laid down by th e Hon. Gentletua ll t hat they were bound to consider what r e d u ction it W as r• would produce the greatest amount of benefit to ther e in But there were other modes of benefiting the pl eo of as effectual as withdrawing from them the he di taxation. The Hon. Gentleman had spoken disPa ra r t booe of the alterations in the tariff; but if the e ffect o ctueo t alterations would be to extend the field of ereP l° •lol —to call forth new exertions—to induce the ~001 ment of fresh capital—and t o g i ve i ncre ased employ to the industrious classes—he thought they le er . o r f e riee ferring on the lower cl a s ses re li e f an d a ssistance' / o the in no degree to that which they w ould derive fro me' abolition of direct taxation on articles of conse n3n , But, as he had said before, the imposition of an '" re' tax was pro both—did absolutely, in fact--PTO gel lief to the lower classes of the community. AVW r e e ot to the reduction of the duty on glass, be so u ' . soft' the Hon. Gentleman that, since the announceraen reduction of the duty had been made, several per se nalin already taken steps for the purpose of investing eaiPon, bo the glass manufacture. When, on a former occel its ilk had spoken of the repeal of the cotton duty l' A e ciso tel vantages, he had not confined hi mse lf to the au ' cost to the poorer classes by the diminution of the loc hig their articles of dress. If that repeal of the c °t , e ti9 jytte e ', did extend t: - .e cotton manufactures, it would larniono' to the means of employment of the working % s of and he said that they could not confer a more s i L l ' e tial benefit by any other legislative measure. T alai! Gentleman had spoken of the advantages atteln on I I/ reduction in the duties on tea. Why a eduction f e xtent nO be .l,os article, to be beneficial, must be to the ° ee o/ millions. A less reduction than that would he; bt to the consumer. Ho thought no one a ould o ' l ol o the reduction of the sugar duties would be be e :, the labouring classes ;and he believed it I' - te el A r o rally admitted that it was not inc° - st give advantages to the consumer, and Colon same time give protection to our °w'o the Ott The Hon. Member had said that the removal °' 'fit ; to which he had alluded would be of great ben e reel he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) begged t f ts seo,r w " the Hon. Member that the abrogation of thos e '3leon, not necessarily involve the others. The 1 1 ° 11 ' be CO - 6 , h had said that those were new theories of his ( o id'', caller of the Exchequer's), but he begged to ll °, be OD Hon. Member that, so l ong ago as th e year le ° o ed dertook to repeal the duties on beer and leathe r " „eOO, he was told that those remissions would not clerico.o; for the loss sustained to th e revenue by the 111 , 0 04 other articles. However, the receipts of the s il o! w, e j years showed that he had no t m i sc alculated , s ate De o the repeal of those duti e s wou ld no t have he ell irbe with the losses anticipated.—(Hear, hear.) to Woe Member opposite had said th a t hi s objection oo k.„t come-tax was that it should be continued beid, •°''; period when the e x ig e n c i es o f th e State retiaL to _e i ,j i a he (the Chancellor of th e E xc h equ er) begg:, "„g now, as he had said b e f ore , that this 7 - 00 1 °7) never be proposed b u t f or the purpose of bo o .4 the exigencies of the State.--(Cries of " There was a time when the affairs of this col bet the continent were such, that taxes could i netie moved, and it was only when peace was re s i , n i on" oe our manufacturers were met i n eve ry Iner' r icleh;:ti world, that it was felt neces sar y t o relieve t be n t its fetters. With respect to the income-taX, w hich 0 , assert, that the facility and cheerfulness with peC had been paid, exceeded the most sangl i , ille finfeeloes tions of those who had imposed it. This ' 0 pePiison also proved by the fact that there had been ' l O 4 n e e, against the income-tax. If the Hon. and Le, e es itlel it e tleman looked through the records °i f o f its to n he did not think he would find any P re° „ g ati . ,r e 0. 0 palatableness, but he would rather see On g on' tiwony of the concurrence of the peo ple tbe neo On all occasions people were u nw illing to P - ore ° ri of gatherer, and so direct ta xa ti on was always te or o , unpopular, but he thought it th e l e ast linr! t re in WI that had heen imposed. He wou ld n ot agr e e be r r tioe . , spect with the amendment. If th e tax Ine e ' bo ttss' t eta delled, and the minimum of i ncome subject re Otbe made higher than at prese n t, then so d ro lor be a falling off in the revenu e ' tho se ot io l 2 Government would not be able to make „ - o nse . . r. ,°leP Lions in taxation on articles of genera' eto' pee' which they had proposed. The only other t h os e to s open to them was to increase the burden eo ro oleeihs sessed of greater incomes, which the GO ve ho d ahe' not prepared to do. The Hon. Gentleman oos ione t in; to assume that the income-tax would be e old er yond three years, but to reduce its amou nt h, th e period would not be prudent or politic. i e et 'oe deavoured to make the income-tax sub serv •-unc le : 0 0"" inter( sts of the poor man by reducing taxatio n u so pet . ,' fief of those articles which came into general C o d therbt it sugar, cotton, &c. The House had thou:4 deg of the measure by a majority of 238, fala i ti - g thel o oet` unnecessary, therefore, to go into any ' e uo iljul i biel; fence of it. With regard to the propriety e on so/ of the selection of the articles, the taxation, o f ); oor ect ei Government proposed to reduce, he w0u 1 ,% 3 0,0 °job° one word. If the Hon. and Learned Genti.e.,ooer'i the to this, he taught do so in a more fitting notice c_IA they were brought seriatim under the L' us idere i r o fite House. Upon the whole, therefore, he te r to etni' tile Government could not have made h. e _ t t t he s tn ment than the present, and he should resist -J moot mendment of the Hon. Member for Liskee r u u . • &eft er flo ttoupt en d e Lord HOWICK thought the Right tb had been singularly unfortunate in his a frie r) efi lj saver the speeeh of his Hon. and Learnesel sn' l ",bo Member f, ,r Liskeard, particularly in t i ld use d'- which his Hon. and Learned Friend 11 ,. 10 00 e nsile the proposed mode of dealing with the °ti er , on ; ti country. It must have been obvious tor rou l g ir i n o j a r the Chancellor of the Exchequer had is speeth avoided entering into details and 0 . , o f 1 , 11 en tert it s e 'a d o ll o ne of in the hopes he professed to creased financial prosperity, and the U m ri uS, of r e s : the income - tax. He spoke in general, ter $ uare e 6oo 4 .. that when one tax was taken off anotn b e t jjon• h i e b i l o , venue generally increased, and the Rig a nt Po man illustrated this position by an arg co ncuisiv ° (Lord Ilowick) thought peculiarly lin jog tbe ftir eK adverted to the year 1830, when, bY tait a, The.' t f e r,. beer, the revenue on malt greatly increasennirely stances now and then were, he thought, c en e T , By removing the tax on beer it was ioeretse ee suppose the consumption of it would ;floe f rom , ~ consequently, the malt tax would increas°..`oooriog,ool"; portion. Again, the country was then tee b a d not" state of great depression—there had tonr u se un.f°_! o o3T, and immense distress, which led to tin ` pre`,`,. Au; disturbances that had occurred a short ni; yos ts /t! Following that year were several gen ° : ":„ nr e illi fe l f ro tte! cession, and trade and commerce_ ha d a_l7sts, ores' present they bad had several good 1 1 ry`„ t are o .„ 4 0 °: peace, and a revival in trade a nd_rn e e n n_r uro t c me a l change for the worse might, in the t hey t . ° could Se sinr things, be anticipated. But how such a chang . e ? He knew not ; nor 000. ,he Rignb to consolation in the budget of the hi supP° 4 •ci 0° b ii~d He must, however, decline giving w ork tion of his Hon. and Learned Frieno let e oeP itt' wer. he 5 ,, roper ye the income-tax any better than that A . t he _ Gentleman ; but he thought the financese df_wp el could not afford its abolition or r c T ro K . come tax were abolished, some newte^_ ros oo b t o posed ; andlnhe could not see, under n At i 0 stances, how a tax less oppressive :y e ti 0)0 _ 0 00 ; iD He admitted that the tax Pr " ri nund e P „ o nl co , were but be F to id or cis" le" equally, and that there fica n O il te e stancesperceive oof hardship o w a oal systemde under its of operation;ra oci it could- be a% °( :Jeti tion as regarded incomes and salariesandof the jo ie op without excluding from the orer t at who ought to be subjected to .. l e , incoru ij e t e n:i:eh e i r e l lt e :f who ought to be exempted. The on th e of inn stances, and no degree of e.nownt degree might deem disposable varied et i c e c d o g r e ding ne 0° 0; 4 those emp:oyed by the Governroe a r di fficalt o l„ k o e, —could enable them to overcome that Each % ? c l etio s the parties could do this themselve. cal , 1 ` of what he could afford. If they founded 0 ,0 00 4 , 0 upon expenditure and not upon n wo ulel. arrive at the object of this tax, they but e if il e 4 * lw o what an individual could fairly expend, in d e s ign to tax income and property would e pees ditea, would be found to be equally andunjust. _ e tr e ge a well-considered system of taxation u :.',. a ving , in view et LI _of would meet the object they hadfor tiliP ur e, 'ot dif regulated tax; each man would jaug`_ xu ene►oo As s bo he could afford to spend, and on that tocel o at' ito large or small, the State would requir e the cored his fair proportion to the exigencies 0. r co red,. # .O O 0 the real theory of taxation, and he °P_ - _ o d o of `job Hon. Gentleman in saying that this w ero gicfi ought to be confined to cases of great 0412 the approbation of the House. The question had been fully debated on former occasions, and the ma jority in its favour was larger than that which usually attended Government measures. But if the income-tax were calculated to rouse the feelings of those who took an interest in the subject, how was it that the lion. Gentk man had withheld his own disap probation until so late a period ?—(Hear, hear.) Why had he waited until the Bill had gone through the House ? He now came forward with a general resolu tion, with a view of drawing within his net those who were weak enough to suppose that agreement in a ge neral resolution would be followed by disagreement with respect to details.—(Hear, hear.) He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not claim for the property-tax what no tax ever possessed, the advantage of pressing equally upon all classes of persons ; but he contended that the Hon. Gentleman was bound to state what taxes he proposed to reduce, and how he meant to provide for the exigencies of the public service. —(Hear, bear.) There was one admission in the Hon. Gentleman's speech to which he could not help adverting. He said he could not go the length of those who preferred generally direct to indirect taxation.—Hear, hear.) It was not proposed in this instance to substitute direct for in direct taxation, but it was proposed, for a limited period to substitute direct taxation for indirect, in a system of which indirect formed the greatest part. The Hon. Gentleman had admitted, that were be placed in the situation of the Government, he would retain the income tax, for the sake of the advantages which might be de rived from it. That being the case, instead of propos ing a resolution that the income• tax ought to be aban doned, he should have proposed one substituting - other articles for those upon which the Government proposed a reduction. He had gone through a list of the articles to which he should have given a preference. He had mentioned tea, tobacco, malt, soap, spirits, and wine, the duties upon which amounted to sixteen or seventeen millions. He stated distinctly that economical principles should have led them to appropriate to the reduction of the duties on tobacco and spirits these three millions of sur plus ; setting those articles against sugar, cotton, and glass. He understood the Hon. Gentleman to say that he had no objection to the reduction of the duty on glass, but that he objected to the repeal of the duties on the other articles. The Hon. Gentleman had pressed for the re: peal of the duty on tobacco and on spirits as a measure more in accordance with the general interest of the community and one from which the poor man would derive reater benefit. The lion. Gentleman went into a 1 41 / 4 \ HONG-KONG. Dr. BOWRING wished to ask the Right Honour able Gentleman the Under Secretary for the Colonies, whether there would be any objection to lay before the House copies of the correspondence relating to the late registration ordinances at Hong-Kong ? Mr. HOPE was understood to say that he did not know of any difficulty in the way of bringing the papers before the House. BANGOR AND ST. ASAPH. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER pre sented a petition from the University of Cambridge for a repeal of the Act uniting the bishoprics of St. Asaph and Bangor. The RIGHT HON. GrriTLEmsri also presented a petition from a body of clergymen on the subject of tithe commutation. Captain BERNAL presented a petition against the re-enactment of the income-tax. Mr. COWPER presented a petition from a place in Northamptonshire in favour of the Field Gardens Bill. THE INCOME-TAX. Mr. GREENE brought up the report on the income. tax resolutions. On the motion that it be read a second time, Mr. CHARLES BULLER rose to move — That the circumstances under which the renewal of the income•tax is at present proposed, are such as to render it exceedingly impropable that Parliament will have the power of dispensing with its conti nuance at the end of three years ; and that it is, therefore, the duty of this House to take care that the tax be imposed in a form in which its operation shall be less unequal and inquisitorial than it now is. He thought that no one would be disposed to believe that in bringing the general circumstances under which the income. tax was to be renewed again before the House he was at all induced to undertake the task by the very great anxiety which the House had evinced upon the subject.—(Hear.) He was anxious to give the House an opportunity, on the present occasion, of explaining to the country and to itself, if it could, the grounds, the principles, the circumstances, and the period, for which this tax was now to be renewed, because he took the question as to the period for which the tax was to be renewed as the cardinal point upon which the tax now hinged, and on this must depend the propriety of imposing the tax at all.--(Hear, hear.) It was owing to the shortness of the period for which the tax was to be imposed, that they assented to the tax without that grave deliberation which so important a question required. But there was, both in the House and outside its doors, a want of determination and doubt upon the subject which was very surprising. The Right Hon. Baronet opposite was the only person who observed any great decision and firmness of purpose. He wanted to have the tax renewed without any discus sion, and he must say that l.e went forward to his object with an undeviating consistency, but as for the rest of them they seemed to be perfectly mastered by his energy. The general sup porters of the Right Hon. Baronet opposite seemed more adverse to the tax than any others, and seemed less inclined to vote for it on account of the fiscal alterations proposed by the Right Honourable Baronet; and then with that noble independence —that self-reliance and vigour of intellect-- which marked all their conduct—(A laugh)—they stated that on no account would they consent to make the income-tax permanent; but then they all said they believed it would be permanent, were it not for the assurances of the Right Hon. Baronet. He never saw so large a hope hung on so little an assurance— (Laughter)—for the other night, when they p us h e d the Right Hon. Gentleman, all he said was, that he did not despair that at the end of three years it might be taken off; and as they believed they had a firm confidence in the Right Hon. Baronet, and bad every reason to rely upon his professions—(Laughter)—they were prepared to come forward in the face of glaring facts to vote an income-tax, not one of them having the slightest hope that it would be got rid of in three years. On his (Mr. Buller's) side of the House they were a sharper set of men.—(Laughter.) I lion. Gentlemen opposite thought proper to laugh at the observation ; but he could assure them that the Hon. Members by w h om h e was suppor t e d wou ld joinin the assent to that assertion. He could also say, with great truth, that they were shrewder men, too—(Laughter)—and, in their name, he would say to the Right Honourable Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government, that there was not the slightest chance of having the income-tax removed at the end of the next three years.—(Hear, hear.) He had beard it said that this tax would not be submitted to by the country, or would not be insisted on by the Minister for so long a period unless it should be greatly modified ; but it now appeared that it was to be continued without any modification.—(Hear, hear.) What, then, was he to think of those who upon ene occasion voted for the tax, and at another time voted against it ? Those Hon. Members to whom he alluded had al ways been in favour of this tax being imposed, in what they called a less and less oppressive form each year. Now, he (Mr. B.) had always expressed himself in favour of a system of indirect taxation ; and he would ask, would it not be worth the while of the Ministry to establish such a system ?—(Hear, hear.) He might, perhaps, be told that the taxes amounted to "so and so," but he would ads, had they not the poor rates, and the borough-rates, and city-rates to meet, in addition to the assessed taxes ? Fourteen or fifteen millions, out of fifty millions, must necessarily be raised by indirect taxation. Therefore, the main reliance of the Government of this country must be an indirect taxation, and their first object ought to be to ameliorate that indirect system of taxation, and make it as perfect as pos sible.—(Hear, hear.) When he came to the conclusion that the' main reliance of the Go vernment must be upon indirect taxation, he thought there was much wisdom in the old idea, that in ordinary times it ought to be the sole reliance of the Government. This fund, raised by direct taxation, ought to be kept for extraordinary emer gencies, and not to be drawn on except in the greatest of those exigencies, because, after all, a property and income-tax must be unjust and vexatious ; they ought not, therefore, to impose it except in those great emergencies, when the excited feelings of the country would induce every man to put up with any amount of inconvenience for the sake of aiding in the national struggle. It was wise, too, that the world should be made to understand that the country had such a fund to resort to in the period of such a struggle, for the knowledge that they had such a treasure to fall back on would add far more to prevent aggresion and unreasonable pretensions by foreign countries than anything they could do for the fortification of their coasts, or the increase of their force in any way whatever. He would not trouble the House with any further discussion on the com parative advantages of indirect over direct taxation, because he was aware there were other exigencies in which he should be willing to submit to an income-tax. For the sake of trying a great fiscal experiment, he should be willing to consent to an income-tax for three years, if measures could be devised that would assure them of getting rid of the tax at the end of that time. But if those measures tended to diminish taxation, no Minister was justified in trying the experiment, unless he had a considerable surplus at his command. If the Right Hon. Baronet would come forward and ask them to submit to the income-tax for three years, for the sake of establishing a better system of taxation, he would cheerfully accede to it. The admirers of the ' budget, particularly on this side of the House—for this was the adulatory side of the House this session —(Great laughter)—praised it as a measure especially calculated to benefit the poor, and as an advance towards free trade. He be lieved it was calculated to do a great deal of good; but the Right Honourable Baronet had also thrown away a great opportunity of re forming our system of taxation, because he had an unprecedented surplus at his command. The Right Hon. Baronet had the largest surplus that ever a Minister of this country had to deal with. He did not complain of the Right Hon. Baronet's having misapplied or misused the surplus, but he had not made that practical use of it which the circumstances warranted. It was only when there was a large surplus that the great articles of taxation could be touched. with half a million, they could only touch the minor articles. It was only, as at present, when they had three or four millions to spare that they could meddle with the great articles of revenue, and favourably affect the great mass of the people. He contended that Ministers with such a surplus were bouni to make the best use of such ample means; and he was culpable, if he only made such changes as were ineffective as regarded the great body of consumers—. in fact, if he made only such changes as could be made at any time, he (Mr. Buller) again said that he had a surplus which enabled him to make a reorma tion, if not a great reformation, of the whole fiscal system, which enabled him to lighten the burdens of the people, without lessening the revenue, The Right Hon. Baronet had thrown away a golden opportunity. It seemed to him that the great scandal of taxation was the large amount of revenue raised by undue taxation on the articles of consumption of the great masses of the people—the tsxstion of articles which, if they were not necessary to the poor man, were at least the luxuries of the very poor man. In this legislation he thought they were guilty of the fault of great injustice, because of indiscrimi nate taxation. They taxed low-priced articles, which the poor man consumed, as high as high-priced arti cles, which the rich man consumed, and therefore they taxed the consumption of the poor man out of all proportion with the articles used by the rich. They diminished the scanty comforts of the poor, and taxed articles too high, for the purposes of revenue; thus checking consumption, and opening a door for all kinds of fraud. With regard to the tax on sugar, for instance, of which they had heard so much, and the reduction of which was put forward as the most popular thing in the budget, he must say a few words. With respect to that question, he meant the'question which had never got an answer— (Laugh ter)—it appeared that the average price of British i n ited pricei in othuold course raise the of manufactured sugar in bond was 34 5 . th e cw t. Th e Right Hon. Baronet would reduc e th e d u t y t o 14 5., ouo s a o rti t c h le at t t o he o ta s x . andlt w original elicited upon thisdiseu article w discussion that m theore than Brazilian the am sugar was 215., and that by our res t r i ct i ve duties doubled t of the cost of the poor man's sugar. Take the article of tea, for instance. The low-priced article cost 9d. the lb., w hil st the poor - man was obliged to pay four times that amount.—(Hear.) By these taxes they more than doubled the price of the poor man's coffee, and they nearly doubled to him the price of soap and malt. They raised the price of tobacco nearly sixteen times, and the same results ensued with respect to brandy and geneva. Surely it was to be desired that sugar, coffee, malt, and soap, should be more easily obtained by the poor man. The duty on spirits and tobacco, he admitted might be attended with some good, but it led to smuggling and fraud, and to many of the crimes and much of the bloodshed, that took place in order to keep up the customs' duties. kle believed that the picture drawn by his Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose with respect to the tobacco duties was one of the most dreadful pictures that could be drawn. He thought the great articles of taxation to which he had referred ought to be the great object of every financier to remove, partly to put an end to smuggling and fraud, and partly to put in the poor man's reach those enjoy ments of which he was at present deprived.—(Hear, hear.) There was no person who bad written on the subject who had not adverted to those articles as matters on which the duties ought to be removed. He would venture to say that if the duty was removed from tobacco and spirits, not only would better articles be obtained in this country, but half a million would be saved in the expenses of the coast guard ; but then it was said the articles he had referred to were great articles of revenue, and that, therefore, it was not safe for the public service to make experiments in those large articles of taxation. He freely admitted, with regard to the tobacco and spirit duties, that in order to try the experiment fairly, they must take away three millions of duties, and that a Minister would not be justified in making such an experiment with large items of taxation, unless he had a very large surplus to fall back upon. But the Right Honourable Baronet had that surplus. He was the first Alinister who ever had such a surplus to deal with, and therefore the first who ever had it in his power to give this boon to the poor man ; to clod effectively with smuggling, and to put taxation on a right foot ing. With not one of these great articles had he dealt, except sugar, with respect to which he had sacrificed revenue, with very little benefit to the con sumer, and simply for the interest of the West India planter.—(Laughter from the Opposition.) Now, if the Right Hon. Baronet had dealt with the articles to which he had referred, fairly and fully, his budget would, indeed, have been beneficial to the poor, it would have come home to the case of the poor man by greatly diminishing the cost of necessary articles of consumption. It would also have been in accordance with the soundest principles of economical science. If the Right Hon. Baronet had dealt in a proper manner with these several items of taxation, he might have rested satis fied that, through increased consumption and the prevention of fraud, the revenue would have so recovered from the effect of reduced taxation, that at the end of three years he would have been able to dispense with the income-tax, the country getting the full advantage of the change which had taken place.—(Hear, hear.) For such an object as that, he (Mr. C. Buller) would have been ready to submit to the income-tax for three years, and 'to run the risk—which he was persuaded would have been a very small one—of incurring the necessity of its further continuance.— (Hear, hear.) But the Right Honourable Baronet came forward and proposed a reduction of taxes, which, though they might have been properly re duced one by one at any convenient time, ought not to have been allowed to interfere with the wiser ap plication of the whole surplus en masse.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The proposed reduction of taxes did not hold out the slightest hope of the revenue being restored.—(Hear, hear.) It was true that the Right Hon. Baronet, with that goodness which distinguished him, turned round to his supporters and told them that he left them the most unfettered liberty of deal ing with the income-tax as they pleased at the end of three years, and the mode in which he prepared the way for doing this, was by sweeping away from his budget every farthing of the surplus which he possessed above the expenditure, even while the income-tax was continued.—(Hear, hear.) They were told that as a matter _of course if they reduced taxes the revenue would recover and produce the same amount. But he did not find any