The Sun. — London, England, 1851-05-20 00:00:00

to know by tho Bill, us it origi immaterial, !aura would that the the second t of a don ates of Ire be the con ned the ec that Act. in so read y might be . Now be oubt as to ; A c t ; but were right ,e so still; hey would °needed in could pro le there to vbether be benefit of ,reed Gen" hat would to Irish, It Engli! h Wisely too tops stood. would also reason regard ition of estator. tsly the sing or pply to e-sen- Roman . The aye the no in o them not the ot; he, >pinion %rrired ) argu is Bill. doubt is Bill, visions •preta- Dm the we in ple he 1, the Com icil on atject UCCI is hools, ed by MI, ho ) that pub hould if he et?-- fficult course to proceed in the usual manner; namely, to post pone I.h, preamble beta they tied di.etbs , .d the clauses of the Bill. He had, upon the sug,:sstion ~f ao Hon. Member, consented once to di'cuss the preamble first; btl% from the difficulties that subsequently arose in eon. lequonce he was warned against agreeing to such a course again. _ Mr. DUNCOMBE—But what about the rescript? Lard J. RUSSELL said it was quite clear that even if be consented to discuss the pr.' amble it would lead to Lothing practical, for then the Hon. Member for Fins bury Would ask for the rescript. If, then, they laid the rescript upon the table the Hon. Member would ask for the authority to prove it to be the one upon which they Were legislating. Why, when they were discussing the Bill of 1829 he might as well have asked for the proof' of the fact of certain Roman Catholic bishops assuming episcoal titles in England and Ireland. Why as to t he rescript the matter was notorious, and required not any ,proof.—(Hear.) After a few words from Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, in reply, Mr. MOORE reminded the Noble Lord that when the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for the Univer. 'ity of Oxford ventured to express an opinion upon the first clause, the Noble Lord said he could not have read the preamble of etke Bill, and unless he read the pre amble it was imposliblo he could understand the first clause. That was then an argument in favour of their discussing the preamble of the Bill before the clauses. Mr. AGLION BY thought that the Noble Lord him self was to blame for so much time being occupied in 'this wa allatHe did tonot think the statement of the Noble Lord satisfacry. No doubt it was the general custom to postpone the preamble; but this was a mea sure which did not fall within the general rules. It was hot in principle or form an ordinary Bill. He con cluded by saying, that if Hon. Members wished the preamble to be discussed, he certainly would support that Proposition. Mr. KEOGH said ho gave notice of a motion that the preamble should not be postponed, but should be dis cussed first. There was a complaint that they made no progress. He could tell the Noble Lord why they had made no progress that night, or since the Bill had been introduced. He wished to take the Noble Lord out of his difficulty. The reason was, that he had not defined What he wanted to effect. He stated that he did not desire to go beyond the necessity of the case. Why then did he not state what it was that was necessary, and what the necessity required. He did not do that. He was constantly chopping and changing. He first gives up a clause at the instance of the Irish Members, and then, under pressure, takes a clause from the Hon. Member for Midhurst. He takes from the sams party a piece of the preamble, and then, on the other side, gives uP a bit of the preamble. He did not know his ()an mind. Then he struck out four lines from the ori ginal Bill after he (Mr. Keogh) had challenged the lave officers of the Crown to state that the allega tions contained in them were true in law and in fact. The Noble Lord framed his Bill by balancing between oPposite parties. Not fixing upon anything definite was the reason they made no progress with the Bill. The Noble Lord gave facilities to other gentlemen which they did not possess, on finding that the Honourable Member for Midhurst gave notice of an amendment Which originally stood in the first clause, and now stood in the second. This arose from the accidental meeting of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Attorney- General, by which his amendment would apply to the Present form of the Bill, but they had not the good for tune to meet an Attorney-General in search of a pre amble, or a Minister in search of a clause.—(Laughter.) The consequence was that an amendment of his would not fit the Bill. He asked was that fair? The Noble Lord said it was the universal practice to postpone the preamble, but that was because the Bills introduced were based upon some principle clearly defined. Was that the case in this instance? At one time the Noble Lord 'aid it was to repel Papal aggression—at another to pre vent synodical action—and then it was to meet a wide spread conspiracy formed against civil and religious liberty. The Attorney-General said it would prevent synodical action. Was that the object of the Bill, or had th e Noble Lord retired from it? Ho was an• aious to take the preamble first, because he felt he would be able to show that it was not true, and if they overthrew the very basis of this measure, the super structure must necessarily fall to the ground. Ile bad a petition to present the other evening against the Ec clesiastical Titles Bill, signed by a parish priest in the 'diocese of Raphoe. Knowing that the Hon. Baronet the Member for Oxford took exception to similar signa tures, he asked if he would take an objection to this pe tition, when the Hon. Baronet answered " diminionis." fieirould not notice it. The preamble referred to a re script giving titles. Now the only rescript of the Pope which they knew of was that of dividing England into dioceses, but in that rescript there was no mention made of Cardinal Wiseman's name. Then the Attor ney -General, when ho explained the object of the Bill, 'gave a different version from that urged by the Solici• tor-Gen e r a l. The Hon. and Learne Gentleman then contended that the section of the Bill which made it il legal for archbishops and bishops to take titles, would `repeal the Charitable Bequests Act. The 15th section of that Act enabled parties to bequeath money to the `Commissioners of Charitable Bequests, for the use and benefit of archbishops and bishops of the Roman •Catholic Church in Ireland. If a bequest was 'Made to, for instance, the Roman Catholic Bishop of •Cork, be would not be able to receive this bequest, be cause it would be illegal for him, under this Bill, to take .lipon himself the title. Sir F. Kelly, Mr. Brodie, and Baddeley held that such would be the effect of the clause in the Bill before the House. No answer had been given to this. It was, therefore, the blunders of the Government, and not the hostility to the measure, that caused the Bill to be delayed in its progress. The sOLICITOR• GENERAL said it would have been as well if the Hon. and Learned Gentleman should have stuck to the precise question before the Committee ' e-snamely, whether or net the preamble was to be post poned. Instead of doing this, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman raised up a host of objections to every Portion of the Bill, and treated the House to ingenious argum e nts as regarded the effect which this Bill would have upon the Charitable Bequests Act. He reserved to himself the power of replying to this objection when the proper time arrived.—(oh!) Surely no argument bad been urged to show that the p reamble should not ° 0 postponed until the clauses were agreed to. Such was the constant practice of Parliament. He denied that the Bill was at all changed.—(Laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh.") The object of the Bill was to pre vent the assumption of titles, but it was shown that certain clauses in the Bill would have interfered with the functions of Roman Catholic bishops, and these clauses were struck out, and all the alterations that had been made in the Bill had been with the view of carry ing out the original intention of the measure,, without in terteting with the functions of the bishops. He denied that any communication bad taken place between the law officers of the Crown and the Hon. and Learned Member for Midhurst since Friday night last. He per fectly agreed with the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir G. Grey) that there was every propriety in inserting the Hon. Member's preamble as a declaratory clause in the Bill. Again, the Hon. and Learned Member for Ath lone (Mr. Keogh) raises a very strong objection against the insertion of the word " dean" after the word " bishop," but, for his part, ho could not account for such opposition on such trivial grounds.—(Oh, oh.) He was also astonished that the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) should haas.rd his opinion by stating that there were new features in the present Bill, for ho assured the Committee that there was nothing new what ever in it.—(Laughter.) The gallery was then cleared for a division, but none took place. On our return we found Mr. REYNOLDS addressing the Committee amid general expressions of impatience. He complained that the Attorney and Solicitor-General had thrown no light upon the matter, and he called upon the latter lion. and Learned Gentleman to answer this question :—Did he mean by the preamble of the Bill and the few clauses that were included in it to interfere with the free action of the Catholic bishops and clergy of the United Kingdom in the eischarge of their clerical duty? Did he mean to repeal the provisions of the Bequests Act, or to direct attention merely to that rescript of which the Hon. Member for Finsbury said they ought to have a copy upon the table? At present they were dis cussing the matter in the dark, and he thought he was warranted in moving that the Chairman should report progress and ask leave to sit again.—(" Oh, oh.") Mr. ROEBUCK, who was scarcely audible, said no body could be more opposed to this Bill than himself, but, if they were to govern the country by means of a deliberative assembly, certain forms of order were abso lately n ecessary —(Hear, h ear .) H e was sure h e was addressing gentlemen who would believe that he had the lame object as they as far as regarded their opposition to this measure, and that he would do all he could by fair argument and by an open and honest opposition to put an end to the Bill; but he entreated lion. Gentlemen from Ireland, as they had a regard for theiroowsitih nc o ou . L. try, not to condescend to this species of (Loud cries of " Hear , hear.) Let them opp go to a divi sion. Let them be beaten. They would a not be con quered b-cause they were beaten.—ld bar hear.) He believed that the sooner the Bill shou e browght into Ration as a law the better, because so soon as it becam a law its impotency would be discovered, and th imbe cility of the Government that framed it would_ be mad e notorious to the world. Let the Government have their Bill; that was the way to d o them the surest mischief; but he entreated Hon. Gentlemen from Ireland to adopt a fair, honest, open opposition.—(Chee rs.) Let them not trifle with the forms of the House, whic h a long experi ence had enabled Englishmen to use with advatlitageemen Don't let it be said that it was reser ved for gent from Ireland to prove that the House of Commons could not govern itself.—(Hear hear.) Mr. MOORE fully appreciated the advice which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had just tendered them, but how stood the case? Her Majesty's Government had that day introduced a Bill into the House which every Hon. Gentlemen, with the exception of the meni• hers of the Government, had stated that he did not un derstand, and even the Hon. and Learned Gentleman himself, who had as acute a mind as any one in the House, had said that he could not understand it. It was unreasonable to call upon them to proceed with the Bill under these circumstances. Mr. ROEBUCK quite agreed with the Hon. Gentle man that the postponement might be asked for the pur pose of letting the subject be understood. Mr. MOORE—That is my object. Mr. ROEBUCK—But a proceeding having that object did not begin with a discussion as to postponing the pre amble, and then accumulate opposition by a motion to report progress. They ought not to take any course which might expose them to the imput.ition that they were not fighting fairly.—(Hear, hear.) It they said openly that they were not in a position to fight the Bill because they did not understand it, they ought to say at once, " Give us till to-morrow." But they had been dis cussing the preamble, and now came to a second propo sition that the Chairman should report progress. • 4:,;;;t1;.)1.,i.L.:: lir. MOORE observed, that th Hon. and L..arned 11.1 ember for Slit-11141d had not been present during :he evening. tlon. and Learned Member for Athlone had never put his amendment. There had been nothing but a desultory conversation.--(0h, and a laugh.) The expression was not but had been applied throughoui the evening. That desultory conversation was raised on the statement of the Attorney-General. The opponents ();: the Bill had never raised di-cuision on the question PETITIONS. Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition in favour of the Cop) hold Enfranwiisement 13 , 11, from some gentle na,n who, under the present law, had had several racehorses seized as an heriot. The E irl of EGLINTON presented, from the borough of Ayr, the most numerously signed petition that had ever been presented from that place. It was against Papal ag•itression, and he could bear witness to what hail been stated be the Noble Duke (argyle) as to the feeling generally prevailing in Scotland against this ag gression. The Noble Earl presented several petitions to the same effect. Lord CAMPBELL would bear witness to the feeling in Scotland on the subject, and he had to present several petitions from parishes in Scotland against Papal ag gression, which had been signed by the whole of the in habitant', male and tem,' of those parishes. Thu Earl or SANDWICH presented a petition from places in Huntingdonshire, praying for a restoration of agricultural prot-ction. Lord S I'ANLEY presented several petitions with a similar prayer, and he was convinced that before any long time had elansei they would be compelled to P 3 Y attention to the claims of the landed interest. The Noble Lord also presented several petitions against Papal aggression; also a petition from Belfast, praying for the establishment of an Irish Transatlsntic packet station. The Bishop of OXFORD presented several petitions against Papal aggression. The Earl of WINCHILSEN presented several peti tions complaining of agricultural distress. Earl Fl CZ WILLIAM presented a petition from Not tingham against Papal aggression. Lard STANLEY presented a petition in favour of the New Brunswick and Nova Scotia Railway. The Earl of WALDEGR AVE presented a petition in favour of the Copy hold Enfranchisement Bill. EXPENSES OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS BILL. Lord ORAN WORTH moved the second reading of this Bill.—Agreed to. PROPERTY-TAX BILL. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the second eading of the Income and Property-tax Bill. This was the Bill of the session, which was of the greatest financial importance. He believed that however imperfect the wording of the amendment introduced into this Bill by a majority of the House of Commons — introduced into this Bill in opposition to the wishes of her Majesty's Government, might have been, it would not affect the legal effect of the Bill. But he would call the attention of their Lord ships to the provisions of the Bill, and although he was not one of those who could be considered as an advocate of direct over indirect taxa tion, and although no one was more aware than himself of the imperfections of this tax, which imperfections had been moat ably set forth by the Right lion. Baronet, now no more, who had first proposed this tax, yet he felt bound to propose the renewal of it as a temp erary measure. He was convinced that Parliament never could remedy the glaring inequalities of this tax, and he thought it was the duty of Parliament to make these immense burdens as palatable as . possible. But these o bjections were subject to two qualifications, the first being how far by the continuance of this bur den they could facilitate the importation of raw produce into this country, and bow far by doing away with other taxes they would so increase the revenue, by encouraging increased importation and increased consumption, so as to enable them eventually to do away with the income-tax itself. Without troubling their Lordships with figures in any detail, he would ask them whether they really thought the tax during the time it had lasted, from 1842 till the present time, had in any visible or tangible form crippled or diminished the commercial prosperity and revenue of this country? If he asked himself this ques tion he found an unanswerable reply in the state of the revenue, not only in one particular portion but in every part. They had at this moment to provide 50,000,0001. of revenue; they had still to provide for the burdens arising from 787,000,000/. of debt. What had been the progress of the revenue since 1842? 48,084,000/. was the whole amount of the revenue in 1842. Since that time 10,251,000/. of taxes had been repealed, and in 1850 the net revenue was 52,810,0001., showing an increase of income of 4,726,0001.; so that the entire amount of the taxes which had been surrendered in the course of the ten years had been nearly restored and replaced by that development of the increased prosperity of the country which had taken place under the income-tax. They had, by the employment of that tax, given to the reproductive industry of the country a power which could not other wise have existed, and they had placed themselves in that fortunate position in which they had to consi der, not how they were to obtain a surplus revenue, but how they were to dispose of it. But as that sur plus was not sufficient to enable them to get rid of the income-tax altogether, he believed they could not pursue a wiser course than to continue the tax in its present form, and to employ it for the purposes pro posed by her Majesty's Government—namely, for the purpose of reducing the duties on those imported articles coffee and timber, and of removing the window tax, which not only pressed heavily on persons of every class in this country, but also, at the same time, most prejudicially affected the sanitary condition of the great mass of the people. The repeal of the window-duty would tend greatly to improve the physical condition of the working classes, by procuring for them more light and air, and a better class of dwellings, in conformity with one of the great tendencies of the present age. They had every reason to believe that a reduction of the duty on coffee would lead to an increasing consumption of the article, and that under that change the revenue might reach the amount produced by the hi t her duty; for that was precisely what had happened on a pre vious occasion. The fact was, that when the duty on ceffee had formerly been reduced, the amount of the duty had actually increased in the course of four or five years. Then, again, with respect to the reduction of the timber duties, he found that since tee proposal upon that subject had been submitted to Parliament, a new impulse had been given to ship-build ing and a reduction in the price of timber had already taken place. The Bill then before their Lordships was but a transcript of the Act which had already on more than one occasion received their sanction, with this ex ception, that it would relieve the tenant-farmers from a grievance under which they had complained that they bad hitherto laboured. The tenant-farmers bad until the present moment been compelled to pay the tax on one-half the amount of their rents, but under the amended Bill then before their Lordships any tenant who could prove that his profits had fallen short of that assumed amount would be entitled to a proportionate reduction in the charge to which he would be liable. The tax was only to be continued for one year, and at the expiration of that period they would again have an op portunity of considering the whole question. Under these circumstances he believed that, with a due regard to public credit and to the promotion of that develop• ment of the national resources which they might carry still further by persevering in the policy they had hitherto adopted, they would feel it their duty to adopt the Bill as it had been sent down to them from the other House. He therefore moved that the Bill be read a second time —(Rear, hear.) Lord STANLEY said the Noble Marquis had moved the second reading of the Bill upon two grounds—first, on the necessity of maintaining the public credit of the country, and on the impossibility of finding a substitute tor the' income-tax in the present year; and, second, on the ground from which be (Lord Stanley) dissented, that it was necessary for the purpose of extending the pre sent commercial system, and for facilitating the iropor tation of those articles of foreign produce, the importa tion of which he (Lord Stanley) believed had already in flicted such injury upon the agricultural interest of this country.—(Hear, hear.) The Government had brought up a Bill, the passing of which, in some shape, was ne cessary for maintaining the credit of the country. He was not the person who would contend that, in the course of this year or the next, they could dispense with a certain portion of the income-tax, and he, and those who acted with him, would not sanction the rash and reckless reduction of taxation which would make the country unable to meet its expenditure.—(Hear, hear.) As the present Bill was a money Bill, their Lord ships had not the slightest power to alter it.—(Hear, bear.) The question was, whether they would sanc tion the renewal of the tax for one year, on the ground stated by the other House of Parliament, or re ject the Bill altogether.—(Hear, hear.) By rejecting it, about five millions would be struck off the anticipated income, and taking the present surplus at about two millions and a half, they would, by rejecting the Bill, reduce the surplus to a deficit of similar amount. He thought, under such circumstances, they could not hesi tate how to act. It appeared that a blunder had been committed in the Bill as it now stood for continuing the tax for one year, and the Noble Marquis had said that that blunder had been caused by the introduction of the amendment. Ho (Lord Stanley), however, thought that the blunder was in the Government not taking care that the amendment agreed with the other portion of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) They might, however, pass the Bill, blundering as it was, or reject it altogether. Ho had not for his own part any desire to offer opposition to the Bill, notwithstanding its blunders. He agreed in what had been said by the Noble Marquis opposite, as to the impossibility of altering the Bill as altogether to avoid inequalities. In point of fact the income tax, as it at present stood, was anomalous in theory and had inequalities in, practice. The anomalies might be diminished, but he agreed that they could not pass a Bill upon the subject that would be in every respect just.—(Hear, hear.) He could not give his consent to continue this anomalous and unjust measure, not as it had been proposed by Sir Robert Peel, as a temporary Bill merely, but as one bound up with the taxation of the country, and kept up for the purpose of carrying out that commercial system to which be was opposed, and which had already been the means of effecting so much loss and injury. —(Hear, hear.) He was of opinion that the House of Commons decided wisely in coming to the determination that the measure should be reconsidered at the expiration of the present year.—(Hear.) He thought that House had decided wisely in determining that whether it was to' be Conti nued for two years or for three years, they would in quire whether, at the expiration of the present year, the anomalies and inequalities could not be reduced and made less oppressive in their operation.—(Liear, hear.) He thought, however, the House of Commons acted wrongly in not adopting the proposition of a Right Honourable Gentleman when he proposed that, without endangering the public faith or the public cre dit, the House should declare that at the earliest pos sible period the tax should be reduced, and that it should not be continued for the indefinite reduction of indirect taxation. The House of Commons had not thought proper to take that course, but had determined • that the tax in its present shape, should only be conti nued for one year. Their Lordships had not passed any opinion on the other measures of her Majesty's Govern ment, but he (Lord Stanley) would be prepared to go i w n h to enthe a diseussion of the policy which had been p ursued Proper time arrived.—(Hear, hear.) It op- Pored that in order to acconagliali an indefinite dove- lopement_of the present commercial system, they were to have an indefinite reduction of indirect taxation and direct taxation, for the purpose of increasing the importa tion of foreign corn.—(Hear.) By such a course they were sacrificing a large amount of revenue annually, which would enable them to relieve the pressure of the income-tax, and while they were losing reve nue, they were not gaining in the price of the artice which would compeesate f it the loss of revenue. As to the reduction in the duty on coffee, he thought it was inflicting injury on the colonial grower, while the consumer did not re ceive compensating advantage. He knew it could be said that the reduction in the consumption of coffee was to be ascribed to the adulteration of that article. That would be raising another question which made the conduct of the Government incompre henstble, by refusing to bring in a measure to prevent the adulteration, and to protect the consumer. He could not understand the conduct of Government in not re medying that evil. He did not know that the country would derive the advantage anticipated from the reduc tion of the duties on coffee and timber. Ile thought the country would lose by the latter reduction.—(Hoar hear.) There had been no fall in prices commensurate with the reduction of the duty, and the consequence was that the foreign producer was the gainer.—(Hear, hear.) As regarded the measure now before them, the question was between the adoption of the Bill as it stood, or its rejection altogether. Their Lordships had not the power to make any alteration. The Noble Marquis had taken great credit for one reduction which had been effected in direct taxation, and he (L Ord Stanley) was not going to say that the abolition of the tax in question was not an advantage. But in doing away with the window-tax they had imposed on the same class of that community a house-tax. The window-tax altogether was levied upon 500,000 houses, but the house-tax would fall upon 400,000. The tax was so charged as to exempt a certain portion of that class who claimed the exercise of the elective franchise.—(Hear.) Now he did not know why there should bo that sacrifice of revenue.—(Hear, hear.) It might be very convenient to increase the influence of certain metropolitan Members ; but he could not see why the owner of a 101. house should be exempted from all taxation.—(Hear, hear.) He thought they might have obtained all the sanitary advantages by doing away with the window-tax, and laying a house-tax to the same extent; or they might have retained the win dow-tax, and enabled the parties to compound for it, and permitted them to open as many windows afterwards as they might think proper. He regretted her Majesty's Government had proceeded on so objectionable a prin ciple, that while the income-tax was admitted to be a temporary measure, taxes were being taken off, and they w ere continuing to bring down the revenue so nearly to balance the expenditure, that it was impossible they could any year have a sufficient surplus to enable them to do away with the income-tax.—(Hear, hear.) How ever the Government might make professions on the sub ject, the country would come to the conclusion that whatever they might say in theory, in practice it was their intention to continue the income-tax. He (Lord Stanley) was, however, of opinion that it was their duty to take measures for doing away with the income-tax as soon as possible.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord concluded by saying, that it was not his intention to offer any opposition to the second reading of the Bill. The Earl of MALMESBURY wished to ask, upon what assessment the house tax was intended to be taken? If upon the poor-rate assessment, that varied in different parts of the country; and if upon the income-tax assess ment, which was supposed to be more fair and more ge nerally equal, new commissioners would have to be ap pointed when the incom e-tax should cease—and we were surely not to assume it to be perpetual. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE observed, that the House-tax bill had not yet passed, and the subject was under consideration in the other House. The Noble Marquis added a few words which were inaudible in the gallery, but we believe they referred to there being means of having the poor-law valuations equalized. The Else of MALMESBURY repeated, that these local assessments varied 20 or 30, if not 50 per cent., from the real value in some cases; and nothing could be more unfair than to base the house-tax upon them. Lord BEAUMONT apprehended that there were always two columns, one stating the rack-rent, the other the rateable value. The Noble Lord seemed to ima gine that the second column would be taken ; that would be monstrous, for one part of the country would then be paying much more than another. But, if the law had been complied with, there was a fair and com plete account of the gross value; and upon that the house tax might be bated. The Earl of MALMESBURY did not think the law was observed in that point ; he thought the Noble Lord (Beaumont) was mistaken as to the practice. Lord BERNERS considered it a duty to endeavour to make the law as little objectionable as possible, and would, therefore, inquire whether the Government con templated any check upon frivolous and vexatious sur charges ? The way in which the tax was assessed in some parts, in Leicestershire for:one, excited general in dignation. There might be one check by allowing the appellant his expenses. The Noble Lord also suggested an alteration in regard to the number of commissioners who had to decide on such cases. Lord MONTEAGLE agreed that it was desirable to diminish any oppressive incidents of the tax, but must say that, considering the circumstances of its introduc tion; there being but one gentleman remaining in office who had been acquainted with the previous tax, nothing coutel be - more praiseworthy than the moderation and goatfense with which this law had been generally ad ministered.—(Hear.) It would hardly be politic to diminish the powers for enforcing a tax so easily evaded. —( [Tear.) But he should be sorry to be considered as approving of such a tax as this, except upon the ground of necessity. In great exigencies it was to be regarded as our great resource; and when the safety and inde pendence of the country were concerned, objections vanished. In fact, it was almost analogous to the press gang. But it ought to be reserved for a great occasion, and especially we ought not to get blindfold into a sys tern of perpetuation under cover of a periodical renewal, without a revision to see how it could be made just and ' equitable.—(Hear.) It was -eten more dangerous when renewed for only a short period, because at every re newal the Government must make sacrifices of other taxes, not beCause they disapproved them, but because they were unpopular.—(Hear, hear.) Like other leases, there was a fine to pay on renewal.— (Hear.) It was proposed for three years, and we had had it for nine; it was to produce less than 4,000,0001. a year, and it had produced above 5,000.0001.; the Go vernment asked. for 11,000,0001, and had got 49,000,0001. —(Hear, hear) —and yet it was to be renewed again.— (Hear.) And why? Because we had been repealing various indirect taxes. No doubt 1842 presented a case of emergency; but, saying nothing of 1842 or 1845, it was impossible to deny that if we went on after the fashion of 1848 no one could see any end to the conti nuance of the income-tax.--(ilear, hear.) It was pro posed now to commute the window-tax for a house-tax. The repeal of the termer house-tax was forced upon a most reluctant Government; and when the new house tax gut into play, we should have the same agency brought into action, and ptobably with the same success, as in the case of the former house-tax. The small as sessment of great houses would be produced as a griev ance. Great mansions paid heavily to the window-tax, aunntythe town country wld s g ee m m t ; e t m o ~ pay ns in a greater proportion house.—(H. hear.) i but, taking the only just' test, the test of value, and not of cost, the King's Arms or the White Hart in the from e window-tax an of r. county rightgiveto o would be relief placed in a position with a view to purposes of health; butt in this commu tation as on the ciuit now tax grea ter danger than the old, and w e s h ou ld h ave a l arger am ount of the public revenue in a position h of dge was He was satisfied that if they wished to maintain the public credit, and the ateans of supporting the public establishments, they could not let the property-tax re main on its present footing, at the risk of an adverse vote of the other House, or of an adverse pressure out of doors. Last year the Government, with the prospect of the discontinuance of the property-tax before them, gave up 1,100,0001. of public revenue, including some 500,0001. or 600,000/. of stamp duties, for which ho had never heard any one out of doors express the least thankfulness. He considered that it would be most dangerous to place the credit of the country to a great or an increasing ex tent upon the foundation of direct taxation. In 1842 his Noble Fri end the Secretary for the Colonies (Earl Grey) expressed his sense of this danger, and called upon Parliam ent to tion if the opp re s sive nature of the income-tax should c onsider what would be their situa make the country refuse to submit to its continuance, and how much embarrassment and how much danger to the national credit such a state of things,would occasion. He thought when t he y found the proposition by Govern ment of an income - tax for three years met by a resolu tion of the other Hous e that it should be continued for only one, that the resu lts contemplated by his Noble Fr a in approaching, and that next year dete rm ine that this tax should be e rp d a m ri i i g a h m t en b t e m a ig c h tu t ally, altogether discontinued. H e wished before he sat down to call their Lordship's attention to a singular fact. They had heard it said , and it was not denied on either side of the,lslouse, that the agricultural interest was at present suffering the greatest depression, while they had been told to-eight that the interests of productive in dustry, as represented by trade and manufactures, were, c 4 s o n re th a e c d o e n al tr o a n ry st , r fl at o j u on ris o h f in t g it was in some meet h.e evils incident to the Now pro perty-tax, that that tax upon agricultural property, even in a time of distress, had gone on auge menting, while the amount of the same tax derived from other descriptions of property, trades, professions, and commercial profits, had diminished, although they were told those interests were most prooftwos.(He hear.) He would take the compari 1843 the amount of property assessed to the income-tax under schedule A, which, he admitted, comprehended mills, buildings, and other things besides land, was 85,000,0001,, and in 1850 it had risen to 94,000,0004 He found that the property assessed under Schedule D, which included all the interests admitted to be the most prosperous, had fallen off from 63,000,0001. in 1843, to 54,000,000/. in 1850.—(" Hear, hear," from Lord Stan ley.) This ,had taken place concurrently with an in crease in the official value of exports from 131,000,0001. in 1843, le 190,000,000/. in 1849, and an increase in the value of imports from 70,000,0001. in 1843 to 105,000,0001, in 1849. Ile considered that the general financial con dition of the country was satisfactory, but he thought they ought carefully to consider whether a tax of the nature of the property-tax should be continued upon light grounds, and especially upon a principle which extended to its perpetuation, or whether they should not reserve such resources for great and important exi gencies. Earl GREY said be would first answer the question of the Noble Lord opposite with regard to the mode of assessing the income-tax. The Noble Lord had stated that he thought the same remedy ought to be given in cases of surcharge under the income and property-tax as in cases of surcharge in the land and assessed taxes, and that the general body of Commissioners should have a voice in the matter. In the case of the income-tax the difficulty had arisen from the secrecy whi c h is bad that the preamble he postp esed; los rep, aced that the Hon. and Learned Member for Athlone had nut raised the question. Tile Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY. thought it would be allowed vest to the last moment they had dis cussed the postponement of the preamble; and the Hon. M , !labor for Dublin had moeed that the Ceairman should rep , ,rt progress. fie (the Earl of Arundel and Surrey) hoped the Hon. Member would withdraw that motion.—(Hear, hear.) If they divided on the post ponement of the preamble, which did not affect any part of the Bill, he trusted the Government would not press the Committee to proceed further to-night. Mr. P. HOWARD begged to add his testimony to that of the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. REYNOLDS stated that none of the appeals which had been made convinced him he was wrong in taking a division. The Committee then divided. The numbers were— For reporting progress 30 Against it 271 M ,j.)rity 241 The Committee then divided on the question that the preamble be postponed, when there appeared— For postponing the preamble ... 253 Against it Majority —213 On entering the gallery, we found The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY expressing a hope that the Government would not press !he House to a consideration of the clauses of the Bill that night. He trusted they would allow the Chairman to report progress, and obtain leave to sit again; and, if no one else did so, he would make a motion to that effect. Sir G. GREY said, the greater part of the Bill turned upon the first clause, and it was important that as soon as possible they should proceed to the consideration of it. At that hour of the night (20 minutes after 11) it was not unusual to enter upon business of a similar kind, and he therefore thought they should proceed Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL appealed to her Majesty's Ministers whether they could ask the House seriously to go on with the clauses that night. Mr. REYNOLDS said, it occurred to him that both the Noble Lord the Metnber for Arundel and the Hon. Member for Kerry had claims upon the Government, for neither of them had voted against Government on the division before the last. They went to the library.—(A laugh.) He should be glad to know what', they gained by going to the library? He did not think. they were likely to get much information, nor had' much courtesy bcen extended to them now.—(Hear.) hear.) What did the 12 or 13 Members who were op-, posed to the Bill, and who went t o the library, gain by, going there ? He male these remarks in order that al few who opposed this Bill of pains and penalties might see the necessity of sanding together.—(Hear, hear.) They gained nothing by political gentility ' • they gained nothing by bowing and scraping to the Trea sury benches.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable Mem ber f.a. Sheffishi had appealed tie him not to press his motion for the Chairman reporting progress, but he could not, as a Catholic Member, acquiesce in that view. He should like to knew what the Honourable Member for Sheffield had gained by the course he had taken ? Why, the Right Honourable Gentleman (Sir George Grey) refused to postpone the consideration of the measure till another day. He gave the Government notice, however, that, without pursuing any course that could be called factious—(A laugh)—there was a sufficient number of honest men in the minority to pre vent their passing a single clause that night—(Rear, hear)—no matter how many divisions might be necessary for that puroose. Mr. ROEBUCK said, the lion. Gentleman had asked what he gained by doing what was right?—(Hear, hear.) He would reply that he believed a large majority of the people of both countries would acknowledge that they were honestly opposing this Bill when they acted on the principle of the Constitution as embodied in the rules and laws laid down by Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) Any attempt to render those rules mischievous must tend to injure the great cause of constautional government. — (Hear, hear.) He did not mean to express the slightest disrespect for the strong feeling of Irish Members on this question; but they would do well to consider the strong feelings of English Members, who had fought the great battle of constitutional government in that House before there were any Catholic Members from Ireland connected with it.—(Hear, hear.) He recollected well that Mr. O'Connell never acted in the way now pro• posed; and, though in 1833 and at other times he was nominally beaten in that House, his victory over the Treasury Bench was nevertheless most significant and striking.—(Hear, hear.) He must say, however, to the Government that there was good reason for post poning the clauses of the Bill. The alterations had been made suddenly, and it was but fair that time should be given to consider fully the bearings of the measure. He hoped the Government would give the Irish Members no reason to say that they were opposed by a tyrant majority, but that they would afford them at least twelve hours to consider the clauses so suddenly intro duced into the measure.—(Hear, hear.) Sir R. INGLIS said, reference - had been made to a tyrant majority, but he would ask the House whether they could hot conceive such a combination as would justify the appellation of a tyrant minority?—(Hear.) Repeated divisions had been taken—in one instance he b• lieved the majority was nine to one—and he must say that, in such circumstances, it might be the duly of the Government to protect the House against a tyrant minority.—(Hear.) The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY expressed his extreme regret that any Catholic Member should have said one word against any Protestant Member who sup ported their cause in that House, still more against one who had supported it with so much ability, zeal, and dis cretion as the Hon. and Learned Member for Sheffield had done. He trusted the Government would yield to the appeal which that Hon. and Learned Gentleman had made to them. Sir F. THESIGER hoped the Government would ac cede to the application. It was important that they should do so. Government had adopted the amend ment of the Hon. and Learned Member for Midhurst, making a declaratory enactment in the Bill applying merely to the rescript of the Pope of the 29th Septem ber, 1850: the Solicitor-General had said, in answer to Mr. Gladstone, although that declaratory enactment applied solely to England, that it would have such an effect upon the law that the judges in Ireland would feel themselves bound by it, and would consider any similar brief in Ireland to be illegal and void. He (Sir F. Thesiger) assumed from that statement that it was the intention of the Government that any similar brief in Ireland should be deemed illegal and void. If so, it would be better that that intention should be declared on the face of the Bill. It had therefore occurred to him desirable to introduce an amendment into the first clause, to make it apply not merely to the particular brief to which it was at present directed, but to all similar briefs and re scripts both in England and I , eland. It would be impossible to enter into the consioeration of that amendment at the preser t time. He therefore hoped the Government would accede to the appeal that had been made to them for allowing tho Chairman to report progress. Mr. GE ACH said he had hitherto voted against the Bill, having been pledged to do so, but he did not feel it right to join in the course taken by the Hon. Member for Dublin, which he considered was frittering away the time of the country without any practical use. Sir G. GREY said that after the division, considering that the previous discussion had turned very much on the first clause, be thought it was the duty of the Go vernment to ask the Committee, having regard to the public time, which the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Geach) bad properly said should enter into their consideration, to go on and make some further progress with the Bill. But, as time was now passing, any discussion that might now tike place it was clear could lead to no practical result in the way of advancing the measure to night. It was true the Bill was not delivered to Members be fore that morning, and that certainly was a ground for acceding to the proposal for reporting progress; he therefore only hoped that on coming to the Bill on Friday next, which was the first day they could ap proach it, they would be allowed to go into Committee ,at five o'clock, and then proceed with the consideration of the clauses. The House then resumes; and the Chairman re ported progress, and obtained leave to sit again on Fri !day next. The Hainault Forest Bill, and the sale of Arsenio Regulation Bill were severally considered in Committee. The Appoinimeet to offices, &c., Bill passed through Committee, and the report was brought up and ordered to be received. CUSTOMS BILL. On the moti , n for the second reading, Mr. lIERRIES appealed to the Government not to preis so importint a measure at so late an hour, when many Hon. Members who were opposed to the Bill were absent. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, it v . ei rather a hard task Hon. Members imposed on %ro w . The Right Honourable Gentleman blamed him , t was forbringing on the Bill. The last night Motion with ' Exck _ qupr before the House he (the Chancellor of the Bill because i had been blamed for not proposing the Re peal Bill was readdwras a u s n e o e p o p n o d se ti d m . e. He would postpone it. The Gunpowder Stores (Liverpool) Exemption to Leavewas * the right of the Crown to deer in the New extinguish given to Lord SEYMOUR to bring in a Bill Forest, and for other purposes; and the Bill was brought in and the motionread a first o time, Ai On S. HERBERT, the Select Com mittee eHla3wasesse,ngAerdsmiralt Smith,wles, Viscount Mel- B w o as nominated i —Mr. Mr. William c i e tn e n t oi:a Mr.th gund, Mr. Adderley, Mr. Vernon , Mr. Willcox, and Nliles, Mr. Divest, Lord Naas, Mr. Birch, Mr. the Select Sergeant Murphy, was s a i p r pinted : Sir John You o l t l i g o ,: o ir f T s h ir om vir as . Smith, Georger Mr on lle t n h l e ey to . Committee on Annuity-tax (Edinburgh) —Sir William Gibson Craig, Mr. Tufnell Clerk, Mr. Deedes, Mr. John Benjamin Bouverie, Mr. Forbes Mackenzie, Viscount Mel and Mr. Heald, Dr. Power, Sir David Dundas, g Mr' Smollett, Mr. Bunbury, Mr, Edward Ellice, and Mr.. Adderley. On the motion of Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL, )fir, Keogh was substituted for the Earl of Arundel and Surrey on the Mortmain Committee. ate, before On© o'clock. The House adjourned at HOUSE OF LORDS, May 19. The LORD CHANCELLOR took ili3 seat upon the Wool at 103 o'clock. .:!-.. . ,~yu.i i 4 ~~~ THE SVN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 20, lB5l. p b e re c s n e r c v o e n wt e h r e r d e , gar - to justly_ matters of a private and confilential nature. Accord ingly the Act had provided that seven Commissioners should be selected from the Commissioners of Land and theex ca a n c s t id"eci' profits il a d n v d isabl business to Assessed Taxes, to whom au appeal should be made in the first instance, with an appeal, if desired, to a special commissioner. He was afraid that the appeal could not be carried further consistently with an income-tax, and with that secrecy which was due to the private affsirs of individuals.—(llesr, hear.) With regard to the observation of the Noble Lord who had last spoken, he was not about to express any opinion very different from that which he had formerly ex pressed as to the objectionable character of the income tax as a fixed tax. He had expressed that opinion very strongly in 1842, and he still entertained that opinion; but at the same time he was bound to say that experience had convinced him that the immense advantage procured to the country by means of the income-tax was worth the sacrifice which bad been made for that purpoie.— (Hear.) The Noble Lord had remarked that the income tax had been calculated only at 3,500,000/., and for three years; while it had produced upwards of 5,000,000/, and had been continued for nine years. It was the pro ductiveness of the tax boyond what was anticipated that formed one of the reasons why he should be reconciled PARLIAMENT . to its being imposed. In 1842 his opinion was, that for so small an amount as 3,000,000/., it was hardly worth while to resort to so objectionable a tax as an income tax; but when, in consequence of its greater productive ness, the Government were enabled to mike reforms in our financial system, that result was one well calculated to alter the opinions he at the time entertained. It was with extreme astonishment that he had heard the Noble Lord opposite assert that the imposition of the income tax had enabled the Government only to get rid of taxa tion the relief from which had been felt by no one— Lord STANLEY—I spoke with reference to the pro posed reduction in the timber and coffee duties. Earl GREY—The statement of his Noble Friend near him (the Marquis of Lansdowne) appeared to him con clusive as to the advantages which the country had de rived from our late commercial policy. His Noble Friend had told them that putting the income-tax out of the question, the amount of taxes remitted since 1842 had been not less than 10,000,000/., and that notwith standing such a remission the loss of income did not ex ceed 700,0001.—(Hear, hear.) Indeed he might say that by the remission of taxes which never went into the Exchequer, but which fettered trade, the total amount of relief given was not over-estimated at 20,000,0001. (Elear, hear.) He should not follow the Noble Lord through all the taxes to which he alluded, and which he thought ought not to have been repealed. He was, however, surprised that his Noble Friend should have adverted to the reduction of the stamp duties as an alteration not worth the sacrifice of income it had en tailed. It was the fate of Chancellors of the Exche quer to bo very little thanked for their services, but his Right Hon. Friend had considered what was best for the public, and had deemed the alteration worth the sa crifice. It had been admitted that the schedule of stamp duties was one full of injustice and inequality— that it pressed on smaller transactions in a manner that rendered these transactions frequently impossible, and that it placed obstructions in the way of transfers of property, and other commercial and business transac tions. By a small sacrifice of revenue the stamp duties had been placed on a fair footing, and the reports re ceived from solicitors throughout the country proved that the effect of the alteration had been relief to an almost incalculable extent on transactions among persons in the humbler ranks of life. The full benefit of such reduc tions might not be reaped at first, but their Lordships might depend upon it that every obstruction taken out of the free career of industry and enterprise was at no dis taut period productive of the most beneficial effects. Amongst all reductions which had been made he believed few were likely to be more beneficial than the alteration of the stamp duties. He thought the Noble Lord opposite must in what he had stated on this subject have entirely misunderstood what had fallen from his Noble Friend near him. The Noble Lord had represented the proposal of Government as implying a determination gradually to get rid of duties on customs, and to trust for revenue entirely to direct taxation. Where the Noble Lord found grounds for such an interpretation of his Noble Friend's speech he was at a loss to know, for his Noble Friend had specially , guarded himself against saying anything that could jus tify such an implication. Perhaps their Lordships would allow him to state what he conceived to be the real principle of this Bill. Ho considered the object of the Bill, not to be to get rid of custom duties as distin guished from other indirect taxes, but to get rid of those taxes, whether of custom or of excise, which were ob structions to the industry of the country.—(Hear, hear.) He might remind the Noble Lord that a very large por tion of the revenue which had been sacrificed in conse quence of the income-tax .had been derived, not from custom, but from excise duties ; and that the reduction of the duties on bricks and on glass had been no incon siderable items of relief. Never had two articles of tax ation been so judiciously relieved. Their Lordships were all aware of the brilliant display in connexion with the manufacture of glass that the metropolis exhibited at this moment. The improvement in the manufacture of glass had been going on, for the last few years, from day to day; and dated from the time when the exciseman 's in terference was put an end to in the works. Although the reduction of the brick duty had only been made last year, still it had been most beneficial. A landowner himself, and, like others, feeling the pressure of the times, be was yet sensible of the advantage of the reduc tion of the brick duty with reference to buildings and useful works. With respect to the proposed reduction of the duties on coffee and timber the Noble Lord opposite seemed to think that the consumer would not be be nefited. Only on Saturday last he had read in a news paper the circular of one of the largest commercial houses in this country as to the effect of the alteration of the timber duty. Though the Bill had not yet passed, the reduction had been in operation for some weeks, and the statement of the firm to which he alluded was, that as regarded colonial timber there had been no re duction in price. He was fully prepared for that, because for some years the import of colonial timber bad been con fined to timber of a peculiar quality which the Baltic timber seldom came into competition with. But, as regarded Baltic timber, the circular stated that the consumer in many cases benefited to the extent of two-thirds of the reduction of duty, in other cases to the extent of a half, and in some cases to the whole extent of the reduction. He believed that that was even more than the Chan cellor of the Exchequer had calculated upon as the im mediate effect of his proposal. The extraordinary ac tivity in all those trades in which timber was much used —such as ship-building—proved the advantage which would be gained to the consumer by the alteration. With regard to coffee, the Noble Lord thought that the reduc tion of the duty would be injurious to the colonies. He had bad communications with persons growers of coffee in the colonies, and though it was not usual for persons engaged in a particular occupation to recognise the re duction of any protection enjoyed by them, yet none of the persons had said that any disadvantage would result to them from the proposal in question. Ceylon alone produced a larger amount of coffee than this country consumed, but the protection it enjoyed was utterly valueless, for the surplus produce regulated the price. On the other hand, tho reduction of both duties would be of the first value to the Ceylon planter, be cause it would extend consumption. The Noble Lord had complained that the Government had done nothing to check the adulteration of coffee, but had rather fa voured it than otherwise. Not only the present Go vernment, but also that of which the Noble Lord had bean a member, had found it impossible by restrictions or by excise interference to prevent adulteration. The other day, when visiting the Geological Museum, ho saw some specimens of very pure chalk, and was informed that it was used for adulterating the best Durham mus tard. He believed the only remedy was for the con sumer to deal only with the respectable trades man, who sold a genuine article; but as regarded coffee the present measure, as far as it went, would check adulteration; for any reduction of the price of the real article must hold out less inducement to substitute for it an adulterated compound. He did not think it would be advisable to establish an exciseman in every grocer's shop in the kingdom to prevent the adulteration of coffee. He should add, with regard to the continuance of such a tax as the income-tax for a single year, that he concurred in the observations of the Noble Lord who spoke last. It was a dangerous measure, but it was one for which the Government were not responsible. After a few words in explanation from Lord BER - NERS, Their Lordships adjourned. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS ;From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons. MONDAY, MAY 19. ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES ASSUMPTION BILL. (IN THE COMMITTEE.) Motion made, and Question proposed, " That the Pre amble be postponed :" Whereupon Motion made, and Ques tion put, "That the Chairman do report progress, and ask leave to sit again." The Committee divided : MINORITY—AYES, 46. Armstrong, Sir A. Howard, I'. H. O'Flaherty, Anthony Arundel, Earl of Hutchins, E. J. Power, Dr. Barron, Sir U. Keating, Robert Power, Nicholas Blake, M. J. Lawless, Cecil Roche, E. B. Burke, Sir Thothas M"Cullagh, W. Sadleir, John Corbally, M. E. Megan, W. IL Salwey, Colonel Crawford, W. S. Maher, N. Scully, Francis mer s, J Michael . P. Devereux, J. T. Meagher, Thomas So Duncombe, T. Mahon, O'Gorman sunivan, J.ll. Fagan, James Moore, George 11. Vane, Talbot,Lord ' • 11. Fox, Richard M. Morgan, H. R. Wall, C. B. Fox, W. J. Murphy, F. S. Grace, 0. D. Nugent, Sir PercY TELLERS. Grattan, Henry O'Brien, J. Keogh, William Greene, John O'Brien, Sir T. - Reynolds, John Higgins, G. G. liorainan, Edward O'Connor, Fea r g la --- - • O'Connell, John EXIIIBITION. Were it to be asked—What is there for Parliament still to do, and why should it sit till the middle of August, there are people who would be at no loss for a reply. There are people, that is to say, who at all times and seasons, and under all possible circumstances, will advise the immediate commencement of the must arduous un dertakings, to be pressed with the greatest rapidity, in the face of the most formidable obstacles. What is there for Parliament to do! Parliament has to reform itself. Parliament has to deliver the administration of law from abuses a thousand years old. Parliament has to give the metropolis what it has not—municipal insti tutions. Parliament has to solve a hundred, problems that have long been vexing the brains of journalists, eel converting shiploads of good paper i n t o unreada bl e pamphlets. Consult these people, and at twelve o'clock on any Saturday night they would have the Cabinet summoned and Parliament assembled for the immediate enactment of household suffrage and vote by ballot. On the principle that good deeds are never out of season, they would have Parliament set about the entire recon struction of tho British Constitution at the very moment when it is difficult to muster a House for any purpose whatever. We are perfectly aware that we shall not please all men by suggesting the consideration of time I and place; but believing, as we do, that there is a time for all things, and that opportunity is one of the first conditions of success, we must say that just now it is not very easy to answer the question, " What is there for Parliament still to do, and why should it sit till the I middle of August?" The Great Exhibition has killed everything else. The Court, the two Houses of Parliament, the nobility, the gentry, the commonalty, the army, the police, carriages, cabs, and omnibusses are all dancing attendance upon it. The shops are unfrequented. The places of public amusement are comparatively deserted. Even the rail ways lose their summer excursionists. Hampton Court and Greenwich exhibit in vain their horse chestnuts in bloom and their whitebait in season. -We question whether even the great Derby-day will attract so large a traction of a million as it has usually done. The tall plant in Hyde-park has smothered everything in its neighbourhood. The Exhibition is London; the Exhi bition is the Parliament; it is the British empire; it is house and home; it is drawing-room and study; it is p arterre, conservatory, and promenade; it is park and club; it is shop and bazaar, theatre, picture gallery,, panorama—everything, in a word, which a man, or a woman wants in the metropolis. The possessor of a season ticket, with a small surplus for cabs, or, in default thereof, a good pair of, legs, is set up for the season. In a palace large: enough to be a glass-case for Versailles, or Windsor Castle, filled with all that is ingenious, precious, beauti ful, curious, or rare, he walks at large, monarch of all be surveys. From the regalia of Indian dynasties to the last invention of European science—from the rude manu factures of people who dwell by the desert, or under the Mountains of the Moon, to the patent for separating the long and short fibres of wool, which is to found a new family of millionaires, everything that the eye can gaze on or the mind can comprehend, invites admiration. There is no door to be opened —no wants intimated—no importunity to be repelled —no purchases expected. To all appearance some twenty or thirty thousand of this metropolis have resolved to enjoy themselves in this palace till they are compelled to be content with two days in the week, or to be lost in a crowd still larger than themselves. But such days and such insatiable wanderings are very exhaustive. Even two or three hours amid " the hum of nations" is enough to knock up a strong man ; and we question whether, since the war, there ever was such an amount of physical and mental fatigue as there has been in this metropolis every evening since the first of this month. Parliament cannot continue to sit with any effect in the face of so powerful a rival, and with so great a drain on the strength of legislators as well as of all other classes. June and July, too, have other attractions, which will begin to hold up their heads and exert their influence, should the novelty of the Exhibition wear off. The season will probably be one of more than usual hospi tality; for there is hardly a family of any position or means in the country that will not find its way to town. With so much to distract, and so much to fatigue, it is useless to say that Members of Parliament ought to be at their posts, to make a House when wanted, to support their party, and do other political drudgery. They ought perhaps, but nevertheless they will not. The session will be the struggle of a sleepy man under a long • and heavy sermon. He may open his eyes, shake him self, and pinch himself, but all to no purpose. After a hundred convulsive efforts at attention, he will be utterly unable to state either the text or the subject of the dis , course. He will have lost an hour, and gained nothing but the discredit of an involuntary inattention. Perhaps the House of Commons ought to do more this session; but, in matter of fact, it will do no more. It will only waste its time, and injure its character by an obstinate and slovenly perseverance in its duties, when it has neither the heart nor the strength for them. Under such circumstances the sooner it shuts up shop the better for itself, and the better eventually for the business of the country.— Times. MAJORITY -NOES, 262• _-_ be h p a c e :t • Question again proposed, " That the Preamble suili‘a poned ;"—Whereupon Motion made, and Question put, " That the Chairman do report progress, and ask leave to sit again.' The Committee divided :- 51INORITY—AYES, 30. Barron, Sir H. Grattan, Henry O'n, Sir T. Blake, M. J. Greene, John O' Brien, Flaherty,Anthon y Blextitt, Reginald Biggins, George Power, Dr. Corbally, M. E. Keogh, William Power, NicholaS Crawford, W. S: Lawless, Cecil Sadleir, John Devereux, John T. Mogan, W. 11. Scully, Francis Fagan, James Maher, N. Fox, W. J. Meagher, Thomas Talbot, J. IL Moore, 0. 11. Fox, Ri c hard M. Morgan, H. K. G. Reynolds, Gibson, T. M. TELLERS . Grace, 0. D. O'Brien, John John Keogh, William MAJORITY-NOES, 271. At the rent audit of the venerable Duke of Port land. held at Morpeth on Thursday last, his Grace, with cha racteristic liberality and consideration for the sufferings of others, made a return of no less than 35 per cent. to his numerorp tenantry in the county of Northumberland.—New oda iourna. , HER MAJESTY'S STATE BALL. The Queen gave last evening a State Ball at Buck ingham Palace, to a most brilliant Court, the invitations exceeding 2,100. The arrangements were similar to the first reception this season, the entire suite of State Saloons being opened and brilliantly illuminated with handsome crystal lustres and gilt chandeliers; the Gar ter-room and Ante-room at the aouih end of the Picture Gallery were also opened for the accommodation of the numerous visitors. The choicest exotics and fragrant flowers were tastefully arranged in the alcoves behind the elevated seats reserved for her Majesty and her Royal guests, both in the Ball-room and also in the Throne-room; groups of flowers also adorned the Pic ture Gallery and the Grand Hall. The company began to arrive soon after 9 o'clock, those having the entree alighting by the temporary gar den entrance, and the general circle entering the Palace by the Grand Hall. All the visitors were conducted by the principal staircase through the Green Drawing room to the Picture Gallery and the Grand Saloon. Her Majesty the Queen and his Royal Highness the Prince Albert entered the Grand Saloon at a quar ter before 10 o'clock, accompanied by her Royal High ness the Duchess of Kent, their Royal Highnesses the Prince and Princess of Prussia, his Royal Highness Prince Frederick William of Prussia, his Royal High ness Prince Henry of the Netherlands, his Royal High ness the Duke of Cambridge, their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Saxe Coburg Gotha, his Royal Highness the Duke Ernest of Wurtemburg, His Serene Highness the Prince of Leiningen, and his Serene Highness Prince Edward of Saxe-Weimar. Her Majesty and her august circle passed through the assembled company in the Grand Saloon, and were con ducted by the Lord Chamberlain to the Ball-room, where Mr. BOOECS quadrille band was in attendance. The general circle followed the Queen and Prince Albert and their Royal guests into the Ball-room. The Queen wore a blonde dress over white silk, with 'coloured flowers of various kinds worked on it, orna mented with bunches of flowers to correspond, and dia monds. Iler Majesty's headdress was formed of a wreath 'of 11)wers of various kinds to correspond with the dress, ornamented with diamonds. Her Majesty opened the ball with his Royal highness the Prince of Prussia, in a quadrille, at five minutes be fore ten o'clock; the vis-a-vis being his Royal Highness the Duke of Saxe Coburg Gotha and the Duche . ss of Sutherland. The other members of the Royal party joined in this quadrille. After this dance, a number of quadrilles, waltzes, and other dances were performed in the Ball-room, by Mr. Boost's quadrille bind. Dancing afterwards commenced in the Throne-room, (where Jullien's hand was stationed) with The Great Exhibition Quadrille In the orchestra were Herr Koenig (cornet 1 piston), M. Collinet (flageolet), Messrs. Baker, Cooper, Doyle, Lavigne, Cioffi, Jarrett, C. Harper, Anglois, Collins, &e. The following dances were played by the band during the evening:— Quadrilles. La Tempesta, from Halevy's Opera. The Nepaulese Jullien. Enfant Prodigue Auber. Valses. Debutantes Marlette ... La Mandoline Polkas ... Straus. ... Kcenig. ... Karl Buller. The Crystal Fountain ... Carl Buller. Die Zapfenstreich IdmaY. Polka des Poignards Doy Jullien. The Koh-i•noor ••• e. Galops. Karl Buller. The Amason ande • Tiger The ••• The Derby ••• ••• Jullion. the evening the com p an y were served with re freshments in the Garter-room and the Green Drawing room. A State supper was served with regal magnificence, soon after twelve o'clock, in the principal dinner-room, on long ranges of tables; the splendour of the service b e i n g heightened by the consummate taste of the decoration. They were most brilliantly lit by gold candelabra. COURT CIRCULAR. The Queen and Prince Albert, accompanied by the Prince and Princess of Pressia, Prince Frederick Wil liam of Prussia, the Duke and Duchess of Saxe Cobourg Gotha, and the Duke of Wurtemburg, left Buckingham Palace at nine o'clock yesterday morning, to continuo the inspection of the Exhibition of the Works of In dustry of all Nations. The Royal suites consisted of the Hon. Beatrice Byng, the Countess A. de Hacke, Baroness Wangenheim, Col. Hon. C. Grey, Lieutenant- Colonel F. 11. Seymour, Major von Boyen, Lieutenant Heinez, and M. B. de Treskow. Her Majesty and Prince Albert returned to Buck ingham Palace at half-past eleven o'clock. The Prince of Wales and Prince Alfred, attended by Mr. Birch, also visited the Exhibition. H o ward, The Duchess of Kent, accompanied by the Pr ince of Leiningen, a nd a ttended by Lady Fenn,' Baroness de Speth, and Sir George Couper, a l s o in spected the Exhibition yesterday morning. from Liverpool. Buckingham Palace on Saturday night Prince Frederick William of Prussrs visited the ia returned to The Duke and Duchess paidde N in e°i t l e the Duchess Queen yesterday, of Kent. a visit Lieutenant-Colonel F. H. and also Prince Albert, attended by k yesterday. Alice, Seymour, rode out on horsebanthe Princess In the afternoon the Queen, with Princess of Prussia and the Duchess accompanied by the ha, took a drive in an open car of Saxe Cobourg Colonel G°t the Hon. C. Grey and - Lieutc riago and four; nßoyle attended - on horseback. niant-Colonel the En . H. Albert, Prince .accompanied by the Prince and Willi of, P r Qbia Prince Frederick ma. u- ) the Duke of §aze .4--- • , ~/ ,di -ici e itueounl; i 5 ..i F e ,l, 'i e•;eitti. I w ill , obourg Gotha; Mid Duke Ernest of Wurterahurg, I rode out on horseblitk at the same time, attemiled by Lieutenant-Colonel' t. H. Seymour. - A deputation, consisting of Mr. H. H. Wilson, Sir G. Staunton, the Right Hon. Holt Mackenzie, Sir Her bert Maddock, Sir Charles Malcolm, Colonel Rawlinson Colonel Syko, Mr. H. T. Prinsep, Dr. J. Bird, Mr. G, Forbes, the ion. H. Stanley. Mr. Atkinson, Mremluot gusson, Mr. Bland, Mr. W. Strachey, Mr. BtlyeMlhaw, and Mr. R. .Clarke, , lad an interview with tOrd John Russell yesteplay, sit.;bis official residence ill-DOWning street. Mr. W. 0. Stanl4 had yestercitit with Sir George Grey, at the Home-office. Dispatches were received yesterday at the Colonial ( office from the , Governor of the Cansdas, and from the Governors of the other North American Colonies. Dis patches were also received from the Lord High . Com missioner of the lonian Islands, from the Governor of Ceylon, and from the Governor of Western Australia. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council sat yes terday. The Lords present were, the Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Cornwall, the Judge of the Admiralty Court, and Sir Ed ward Ryan. The appeal " Lomi v. Ash well," (frodirThe Prerogative Court), part heard, was heard. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. TIMES. —The extraordinary transformations which the Ministerial measure, no longer properly called the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, has undergone, and seems likely to undergo, lead the contemplative mind to some curious speculations as to the noble science and much-practised art of preparing and Passing Acts o f P a rliament. Th e first question relates to preambles. The practice is in favour of considering tbi;'preasable last. Mr. Keogh is anxious to take it in this instance first. Other Mem bersprinciple of the Bill; and consider that there need be no prea m bl e at a ll. Th e i p f r i e t am he b a le s i u s u s u ai d d m to a c m o im ntai hi n the princ ipl e to awmain, a principle clearly before wo attempt to apply it, Airs K eog h' s v i ew would seem not to be devoid of plausibility. It tier 'tainly seems more satisfacititY 'to select a sound, prin ciple and frame an Act upon it, than to pass th e A ct first, and then fistssetttlits ~ principles its details afterwards. Much / alio - may be said in favour of having no preamble at ail. If the original preamble can be struck out, and another of totally different ten sdency-can be inserted, - ttre - etacting part - all the time remaining precisely the same, it is not easy to see what useful part in the constitution of a law the preamble can perform. But besides all these different questions as to the nature and use of preambles to which this Bill has given rise, there is yet another, more press the propriety o f h av i ng ing and p ract i cal than any of them—the quest i on as to two preambles quite independent of each other, and leading to different conclusions. The Ministerial measure as it originally stood was simple and intelligible enough. It recited a mischief, the vio lation, namely, of the 24th section of the Emancipation Act, by the assnmption of territorial titles not strictly within its provisions —and extended the section so as to remedy the mischief complained of. This manner of treating the subject had its faults, but it was at any rate clear and consistent with itself. The misfortune was, that it neither touched the grievance of whiCh the nation complained nor applied the remedy Which it required. The grievance complained of was not so much the infraction of the 24th section of the Emancipation Act, about which nobody troubled themselves very much, as the intolerable insult received by the Crown, the Church, and the country; and the remedy required was, not the extension of what Mr. Disraeli calls petty penal legislation, but the vindication of the national honour and independence. People whose minds were full of the Rescript and the Pastoral were surprised and displeased to find themselves, in the very heat and tur moil of agitation, called away from the exciting ques tions of the present to discuss them under the arbi trarily-selected and ill-chosen form of an attempt to patch up the provisions of a penal law of more than twenty years' standing which no government had ever attempted to put into execution. The view of Mr. Disraeli, in Friday night's debate, which is substantially the same as that announced by Sir Frederick Thesiger and Mr. Walpole himself on th e secon d rea di ng of the Bill, was also simple and 'coherent as ori ginally expressed. That view was to substitute for the Ministerial measure a Bill which, avoiding the prudery of appearing to forget the very circum stances to which it owed its origin while they were yet loud in every one's mouth and fresh in every one's mind, should deal with realities instead of shadows, and, as it was undoubtedly caused by the Papal rescript, should be framed with exclusive reference to it. Such a Bill would be, as Mr. Disraeli phrased it, a purely retaliatory mea sure. It would meet the overt act of that great con spiracy against the liberties of Europe which Lord John Russell announces, and which the confiding leader of the Conservatives affects to believe, by a counter move proportioned to and directed against that act. Hero again was a clear and logical Bill founded on a notorious aggression, and applying to that aggression an adequate remedy. The pteamble to such a Bill would be, of course, a recital of the Papal rescript, and of the acts done under it. The Bill itself would declare the rescripts and the acts to be illegal and void, and inflict some punishment on those who put the rescript in use by as suming titles confirmed by it, or giving it effect in any other manner. Here are two perfectly distinct ways of treating the subject—the first, by patching up an old law; the second, by making an entirely new one. The original Ministerial Bill could not have omitted Ireland from its provisions without deviating from the spirit of the section which it undertook to amend, and intro ducing an entirely new principle under pretence of ex tending an old one. The Bill not pretending to 'be formed on recent occurrences, but simply on former legislation, it may readily bo conceded that to have ex tended the 24th section of the Emancipation Act to England aTO - no would have been to bare introduced an invidious anomaly against which the Irish Church would have had every reason to complain. This neces sary consequence of the form in which Ministers cast the measure was not the least among its defects. But if the Ministerial Bill necessarily included Ireland, the pro position of Mr. Disraeli and Mr. Walpole of founding the Bill on the rescript as necessarily excluded it. All the logical considerations which drew Ireland into the one enactment rendered it inadmissible in the other The Papal rescript had nothing to do with Ireland, and any measure really founded on the rescript could only embrace that country by forcing on the premises a conclusion wider than they could support, or by adopt ing new and complex principles, and so marring the simplicity and coherence of the original design. Thus, Mr. Disraeli, while he announces that he can only consent to a measure of strict retaliation, tells us in the same breath that it must extend to Ireland, and thus lose the very retaliatory character for which he stipu lates. There may be abundance of reasons why the Ro man Catholic Prelates of Ireland should be subjected to penalties and restrictions. It may be necessary to the security of the Protestant Establishment, it may be re quired to repress synodical action, but it certainly never can be required or justified on the ground on which alone Mr. Disraeli puts it—that of retaliation for ag gression on England. The absurdity which M r i e Dis raeli has an nounce d i n genera l terms Mr. Walpo has worked out i n d e t a il. Th e Bill, as he frames it,sndtwaus Ministers seam di s posed to assent to it, has other osing a preambles, distin c t from, and independent of, —one true the other false; ono natural, tie s to really emchother ra th ii u3otion. ,the other e measure to a owe ficial; one introduced for the sake o f truly exp causes which have put Parlism - the to give an excuse for extendin g nor compatible with its ob jects. We do not say th at principle p th le ere may not bo reasons, such as the Spied of Thurles, t he conduct of Primate Cullen, and the Governmen t measures of educa tion, which might with h render tt necessary to contr o l w i t h interference t more strictness the conduct of the Roman Catholic hier archy in Ireland. . But we do sly that Ireland has every right to comp j am w hen the symmetry of th e Bil l has been tilated and destroyed in order pur posely mu to her into a quarrel in provoking which she h a d no s hare, thrust though the penalty is to alight equally upon her bead. It might have been too much to ask that she should have been made an exception to a measure in whose scope she was naturally included, but it was not unreasonable to ask that she should not be intertwined whose ßu tt o h r e g api morez a t s i t o r n e u h g e l r y prese nce s a e r n e c e i m o p n r l y e s s s e e d r v e w s t t h o by an odious parenthesis with a m easure complete without d h e e s r r a o n y d . these convictions the more clearly we see that the most from m right the whatever quarrel betweento com pl a England n u devoted member of th e I r i s h Establishment would have g of lan th d e and the absence pofeple_t Ireland more do we feel the helplessness of the condition in which her Parliamentary champions have placed her. Instead of urging on the House the propriety of discriminati n g between th e cases to which the rescript did and those to which it did not apply, we find them labouring es ear nestly as M r. Di sraeli himself to confoun d the ca s e ofthe their o wn anc i ent and firmly-settled hierarchy with tottering and new-fangled titles of Ullathorn e and Wise man. e h c im ity ab c o or u o t n a er, fort TILE VAUXHALL a 111 pol V ic il e- D co E n ' s ß tf:tble of the g a e tt o e f nd h a i i s it d u u p ty o . n th e Yesterday evening Mr. Payne b y th re - Burned the inquiry, commenced over and night since, into the circ t u h m e death of Henry James Chaplin, L division, who was killed by the violence offered to him by several ' men while in scliasnch"asr answered to, The names o f the jury having been c alled w as re-examined-- Inspector Carter his a police-constable i n. division . IT —.O was 23 years of age ., He always bore the character of a steady and well conducted man. There were, as he h a d already stated, and several men in custo dy awaitin g f urther examination for having murdered the deceased. He deemed that the evidence be bad already adduced would be sufficient for the purposes of the come prepared to bring forward any more. Th e CORONER, upon this intimati• • on, read over the de positions taken at the former examination, and then proceeded to charge the jury, explaining to them the different circnmsta which • ' o f tees constituted the crimes murder 1111,.. A manslaughter.TT 'several .L.Le cited instances, showing the diffirnity of determining t h e precise bound ary between th e two offences; but a dded, that in the present case no difficulty cou!fl exist, as all the circutu• stances seemed to indicate that it would be their bounden duty to convict the prisoners up on the more serious charge. Here was a countable, prored to be a mild end steady man, assaulted with such violence thr,t he sus vived it but a short time, by a cc' of men to whom he had given no provocation, but with whom he was remon strating in the duo execution of his offiee. He thought, that whatever might ultimately be the result of the case, these men ought to be indicted for the capital offence. After a few minutes' discussion, the jury returned a verdict of " Wilful Murder" against Patrick Cane and John Thickey. The CORONER then issued his warrent in the usual form, and hound over the witnesses to gird their evidence e t t,4 0 t r i lt i l , 1 , 71 a t , t, oi:-.. - ... ~ 2 1 a , ~ , i c l / 2..., ~,, .. R .41a.03 ►1 the nr the tion? )bject r dis- Bill. pro- as of 1 the 'the was low, Ca any )f a