The Sun. — London, England, 1853-04-19 00:00:00

think it far better-far more in accordance with our own O bligations, and f a r more likely to advance the interests of the country-that we should present to you what we think -and I will tell why we think it by and by-a real s ubstantive plan-(hear, hear),-under which the income al, if Parliament should think fif, be got rid of, than that we Y should come with some paltry proposal to shirk the difficulty by re-enactinc , it for two years, or re - enacting i tfor one yea r , an d thereby prolonging the uncertainty and dissatisfaction, and giving rise not only to doubts as to th e p os iti on of the tax, but as to the perfect good faith of Parliam en t i n d ea li ng w ith th e co untry. (Hear, hear.) have, embOdied in the proposal for the renewal of the tax : w ill tend to show_ Parliament and th„ country that our in tention to part with it, or, at all events, our intention to Put Parliament in 1860 in a condition to part with it, is a luta b ona fide intention. (Hear, hear.) But you will say \--m a say justly-that that intention does not of itself put Parliament in a condition to part with the tax,-that it is *l3l- 5' well to say that it shall, for two years, remain at 7d. 41 1 the pound,-that for two years more it shall be 6d., and for three years more sd. ; but that when it comes to sd. . I° ,,, 6 e 4° r nay find that there is still a deficiency, and that you ; 1 , 1 want the 7d., or that when you come to the end of Period for sd. in the pound you may find you cannot rt with it. (H e ar, hear.) With respect to this objection have to say, that before the close of my present state- Meat I : h a ll endeavour to give you full satisfaction on that Point ; and I will further venture to s:•-y that, whatever -13 ‘ 1 may think of the plan I have to propose, no gontlem n 1 1 4 _ the comm itt ee w ill thi n k th a t th e Government are pal tering with the House of Commons, or that I am not pre senting a proposal which is at any rate substantive and Int elligible. (Hear, hear.) I say, Sir , that our principles witl l respect to the income tax (which is the corner stone our whole financial plan), our principles with respect to the e income tam required of us these things :-In the first Place,- to mark it effectually as a temporary tax ; in the liee nml place, to mect, in a way which we think good and effectual, the public feeling with respect to the inequality of the tax ; and I will explain how we mean to do this by an d 0 3'. But, beyond this, I wish to ask-and this is the Portant question to which I wish to call the attention 7 tPaiiiament-if you determine to renew the income tax ~71 1_ ...Y0u make early extinction your first and sole object, t ., - ; will you, in order to bring to completion the noble work eoMmercial reform which is far advanced, associate the e elne tax once more with a remission of duties, exten "'Ve in it se lf an d b ene fi c ial to the community ? We have cons idered fay these two questions; and we have deliberately in favour of the second. (Hear.) 1 ." une we propose to renew the income tax, we pro '"se to associate it during the years which it has still to t a n with a grea t an d beneficial remission of taxes. (Hear, r ea r.) But the statement which I have already made with t r,Pect to th e sur pl us i s one not a:together promising in Le h s respect. He would be an ingenious minister of finance k „,_° should found an extensive remission of taxation on a re gards of 800,0001., 200,0001. or 300,0001., of which he re il,7B as uncertain. If we are to propose a remission of -e s we must have funds out of which to make the remis - Z e n. Thi s i s o f course an elementary truth, but I am sorry r i s ay that it is not wholly useless to impress it upon the t a se (Laughter.) We have, therefore, to consider-and 4 , Sir, is the invidious part of my task, upon which I th e k now about to enter-we have now to consider what are means open to us, in consistency with justice, for ol' th ,_' -a ing a fund which, in conjunction with our present I tt - P„... 1118 , we can apply to an extensive and beneficial re- T h rn of taxes. Now, the first question which is raised t l l.7 -1.8---- if the income tax is to be continued, shall it also be ) 3 ;`,mled? (Hear, hear.) And the view of of the Govern in -In ' is this- that the late Administration were right th stating that, if the income tax was to be continued, 1: e xemptions under it should be narrowly considered th:r, hear)-- an d therefore we are prepared to deal with • nnestion of exemptions. (Hear, hear.) What, in the • Place, let me ask, is the case of persons enjoying in. t e l t ," immediately below 1501. per annum ? There may ; . `nse who say that it is dangerous to attempt to levy tb e te ilicome tax on incomes below 150/.; butt is my opinion the safety of the measure depends in a great degree it kay • i mainly-on its justice ; and if you can show that bead{required by justice to other classes, and that it would selves to the country, and even to the parties them af,lB who would be immediately affected by it, I am not 4 ° ,7' 1 with the confidence I entertain in the feelings of -lAiglish people, that there would be any danger attach • L to such a measure . (H ear .) Th ere were apprehensions, know, entertained in 1842 that the imposition of the the tax in any shape would be found unpopular ; but appreciating S ense of justice and enlightened prudence of the people, igreciating as they did the great benefit achieved by its r unientality, divested it, if not of the unpopularity, certainly of the odious character, which it was thought Zight generally have attached to it. (Hear, hear.) Well, what is the case of persons enjoying incomes below " ? It is well known that persons of that class have 4 1 7 largely benefitted by the . measures consequent on the ~,....ebree tax up to the present time. (Hear, hear.) Twelve ' , Wiens of taxes have been remitted, and they have : . nibyed their full share of this without the charge of one farthing. (Hear, hear. ) I don't propose that we should ears the tax do w n to the regions where it would trench on labour. To my view it is a right and expedient Principle-taking in connexion with it all the circum ttances of the case-that we should not trench upon what . 1 - would call the territory of labour. That territory will kobably be defined sufficiently for my purpose by the Lilure of 1001. a-year ; and what lam saying now has " 1 4 ,,erence to the case of incomes between 100 1 . and 1501 . V 4 ,_eir ease is, that they have enjoyed up to the present Ztoe the full benefit of the remission of the 12,000,0001. of Laxes to which I have referred. But that is not all. If were going to continue the income tax for a short it e d without any compensating advantage then, indeed, i t !bight not b e ex p e di en t th a t I should ask ' you to extend forrio lower amount than at present ; but lam going, be ll% a !, conclude, to ask you to support the Government in na; e ' l ng a great and beneficial remission of taxes ; and I eon' s :a efo re you confer that great additional benefit, let us f3q, , ,T," wheth er th e resu lt s o f our plan can be distributed vrilj aul Y among the various classes of the community. I a i de present to the committee what I think they will con °Parajanie interesting results with respect to the past vi ew ion of our recent legislative remissions. With a ope,h, to the d ec i s i on o f the question which I am now eolf;Z, it appeared to me a matter of extreme interest to t he e, e 'lumber of bona fide cases of the distribution of tat e ,lengiture of particular families receiving different each (),,' income, making the proportion in which they had head by the adoption of the income tax and the ' F e s , connected with it. My right hon. friend the : 04 , - ; u e Poor-law Board (Mr. Baines), kindly lent me ;nit effective aid, and we have collected a body of in pence of the kind which I am now about to present to inenelMittee. I shall not trouble you with the details, but notn a i give the general results of a few bona fide cases of Cases IXPeU diture, and I believe they are fair average been w hich will exhibit the actual savings below h l hze n 'ad, I F , - „ a t e ed by persons whose incomes are elow a e L by "hose - hose incomes are above 1501., cense teieliaaje's of the adoption of the income tax, and of the re- Nthi o ,o of taxes and changes in our commercial system !ill X, Were brought about through its medium. But it haw be reelected that, in estimating the savings, I trot; L a ken credit for the further remissions which I have , " kl, l%; . ' e d as well as for those which have alr ead y taken p lace. iqot' e Collected six cases of incomes varying from 1751., to 44 (1 f a7 ear ; and, after taking credit for all their savings, ksl t .'"'-rIY putting down the various items which go to a •ko nb ll 4 .P their incomes, I find that their gross incomes le akii; t o 1 ,359/. and their gross savings to 63/. is. 3d., tsaving of 5 per cent. on the gross amount rhiebi ts ulcoines • and even if you deduct the income tax , - ` O Y" paid will still remain a saving of 221.165. ni c l nearly 2 per cent. upon their incomes. This, I is not an unsatisfactory result which I have pre tlt tile committee. (Cheers.) But I have likewise ce e nv cases of the actual expenditure of persons with shoulliies between 1001. and 1501., and these, the committee Pe r the u nderstand, are not cases which have been selected %se a ;Purpose of arriving at a particular result, but are tnrp o ; 'jell have been fairly and honestly collected for the "tire " e of showing the actual distribution of the expendi ll*,two classes to which I have refed. Oe is lieco u caße of a country tradesman with 1201. pe annum; the 14 i.1 the case of a retired Liverpool tradesman ~° f 4 Zeren) with 1201. per annum ; the third is the case 501 ‘ ‘uow in the country with an income of from 1201. to 'a r kl'LY 1351. per annum) ; and the fourth is the case of a country to with 1001. per annum ; making 4 1a Income of 4751., and their gain has been 29/. 6s. tsr . ' "I' between 6 and 7 per cent. Deducting income keo at the rate of sd. in the pound, the savings would Yon all t to 191. 95., or more than 4 per cent. So that eco nes B te clearly rom this that the persons with in ,Y th etw een 100/. and 150/. have apparently profited 4 841 ,1 change in our legislation to a greater extent in "'lose with incomes above 1501. (Hear, hear.) I ought k:aY that in estimatinc , the savings I have endeavoured to he'vP strictly within the a bounds of moderation, and that I sw e l l :, 0 . doubt that the results could easily have been th e , " we had chosen. Now, Sir, it appears to us that tvb e . L f acts offer a rather strong reason for considering cue. 14 ... er, when we propose to renew the income tax in the ze ae ,°f arsons with incomes above 1501., it is not de ll) 'ed by justice that we should expect that persons with thc..otnes below 1501. should moderately become sharers in burden. (Hear, - hear.) Her Majesty's G overnmen t 'wkak that in justice we ought to do so. (Hear, hear.) teat wepropose is this-w e p ro p ose so f ar t o complicate io ; tax a s to introdu c e a p rov i s i on th a t i ncomes b e t ween /, and 1501. shall La liable at the rate of sd. in the 15° , for the whole time during which the tax is levi e d, that, for the first two years, incomes above 1501. will taY 7d. i n th e pound, and incomes below 1501. sd . ; f or .4e next two years, the one will pay 6 d. and the other 5d., 'n4 fo r th e f o ll ow i ng three years both classes will alik e pay „, the rate of 5d in the pound. I estimate that this tax . 1; 4 „, 5 d. on incomes from 1001. to 1501. will produce 250,0001., v" as it will not be levied till the latter half of the present ear, the sum of 125,0001. only will come to credit in the ,tiancial year of 1852-54. (Hear.) I now come to another G ea , i t question-the exemption of Ireland. (Hear.) Ire ta,,lll like manner, has received the benefit of the income sa, 4- through the changes in our fiscal system but at the tim e the equivalent which was intended to be taken ti; s not bee n exac t e d. Th a t equ i va lent was twofold. In gall, place it consisted of a duty upon spirits of ls. a e na ° ,a; Which w as a b an d o ned almost as soon as it was ti e 'ln the second place it consisted of an augmenta le; 1) f the stamp duties-which augmentation was indeed e(1 for two years • but in 1850 my right hon. friend the [Paident of the Board of Control (Sir C. Wood) made a ,tilep reduction in the stamp duties loth of this country ei , oe _uf Ireland, and in that reduction disappeared the in Which was enacted in Ireland as an equivalent for ei k i o l acorue tax. lam not able to speak with absolute pre tit,tn.2 but as nearly as we can make out, it would appear trap 'ne rate at ashich Ireland pays stamp duties on her ktell_tactions is nearly as possible, on an average, the t "' as it was in 1842. (Hear, hear.) It is, indeed, true 1: si ne the • has e first enactment of the income tax Ireland se otir e en visited with an awful calamity, and although that still ~,ge has been mercifully withdrawn yet traces of it h ear emain in many!iocial and economical forms-(hear, nen ß ,„7 - Lu_especially in the form of a very heavy and bur of the debt. (Hear.) That is but a fraction, indeed, th " e e_nerous aid accorded by the Imperial Parliament :6 ) 0 d eti r_ e e si oe t tsitie s of Ireland, but at the same time it cannot Ireland. at it is a very heavy and enduring burden, not Brit th o _ generally, but on its most distressed parts. by th e lie who look at Ireland cannot avoid being struck ue-! Met that all Ireland is not alike-that there are f„;a111 districts that '". l ta x ti at do not need to shrink from their a off _ o ll- ,, and which have no reasonable claim or ~,I :4P a to VIM th e ur exemption. (Hear, hear.) Let me committeere what exemption means. (Hear, hear.) di we have not got a bottomless purse, and that in e rt ", nnot exemptions to one man without in tr;g another P • er tat the exemption of one man means the the - taxation f another -and exemption of one country 4 .,.,,extr a t axi) ; ion of another. (Hear, hear.) And as this I, ( ll 4 l :l B ae t 7. t changs in the income tax generally, so it applies 're : relatively to England. What we think, there 'id 44 ' t hat the ' 111 erati6u''in CA,O of Ireland demands very special col: pc,e4 her, with the burdens that have bet , _tt a by e, with • respect to which I will-say more by : 41 1 iii,j eek V) sequel or corollary to the present branch of won bid, in the 11 meantime, I have to say that we see /17 the 14' QOM° taxa oliould not be levied WA land, as she has received a great portion of the benefit at tending the remission of taxes up to the present time, and is likely also to profit largely by the remissions I have to propose to the house. The produce of the income tax which will be laid on Ireland ender precisely the same conditions and for the same term as in England and in Scotland—the produce of the income tax in Ireland I estimate at 460,0001. a year ; but as the tax will not he levied till June next, there will be only 230,000/. to come to credit in 1853-54. I will now give the committee an account of how my esti mate stands, as a whole, with respect to the income tax. The estimated produce of the tax—supposing there to be no change in the existing system—is 5,550,0001. Deduct life assurances (120,0001.), of which one-half only comes to charge this year, viz., 60,000,, there will be left 5,390,0001. The extension below 1501. we reckon at 125,000/. ; and the extension to Ireland at 230,0001. ; making the total for the year 1853-54 according to the proposed plan, 5,845,0001. (Hear, hear.) I now come to another proposal for the aug mentation of taxation to which I invite the special atten tion of the committee. _lt is one of great importance. It involves both economical and social considerations of the highest nature. I have stated to the committee that we propose to enlarge our means by new taxation with a view to further beneficial changes in our fiscal system. That is one object we have in view. Another object is—and it is likewise an important object—to meet the public feeling, which we recognise and share, that the operation of the income tax is severe upon intelligence and skill as compared with property. I frankly own my total inability to meet the feeling which has been excited upon the subject of the income tax, and that I think I should be guilty of a high political offence if I attempted it. But let me now point out to you that if you think that intelligence and skill un der our system of taxation pay too much, and property too little, there are means of equalising the burdens of the two classes in a manner which would be on the whole safe, honourable, and efficacious. Sir, I refer to the question of the legacy duty—(loud cheers)—a question which it is perfectly plain cannot be dismissed from the consideration of the house. In my opinion it is a question of which the earliest settlement will likewise be the best. It requires settlement. The tax is not just as it stands. And how is it unjust? I frankly confess that I have always thought the view of the case, as stated by the hon. member for Lambeth (Mr. Williams)—who has exerted himself effec tively on this subject—(hear, hear)—l have always thought that his view, if I may say so without offence—was a most inadequate view of the state of the case. (Hear, hear.) The tax is supposed to favour landed property, which I do not deny; but it also favours property which has not that claim to favour which landed property and household property might perhaps' fairly urge as a ground of exemption firm taxation. (Hear, hear, from Mr. Williams). lam glad to hear the hon. member echoing that sentiment. I wish to set aside the impression that the question bears on its front the odious aspect of a question of class. It does no such thing (Hear, hear.) We propose to alter it, and, subject to conditions which I will state, to extend the legacy duty to all successions whatever. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the probate duty, at the present moment we do not venture to deal with it. The probate duty itself, I grant you, calls for re form, and if the Government had the means of carrying out that reform in the present year it would have been satisfactory to have done so. As it is, we are obliged at present to postpone it, but we hope that in a future and early year it will come under consideration. It is said that the legacy duty is in the nature of a tax upon property. It is a tax upon property, and beause it is a tax upon pro perty it meets the views which have been so much favoured by a large portion of this house and by public opinion— namely, that if the income tax is to bear unequally upon intelligence and skill as compared with property, then that inequality ought to be redressed in some way or other. I think this is a safe mode in which to redress that inequ ality, and if this is a tax upon property it is divested of the danger that attends the taxation of property generally. The mischief of taxes upon property is the liability of a constant recurrence of those struggles of classes. But in carrying into effect this increase in the legacy duty you have this great advantage, that the liability to pay occurs only within the limitation which the laws of a higher power have ordained ; that it only occurs once, on the death of a man ; and that no man can die more than once. (A. laugh.) I may be wrong. (A laugh.) But I assure the committee that it appears to me that this is a most weighty consideration for those whose duty it is to inquire how they can best neutralise the social dangers incident to all questions connected with the taxation of property. You find the principle of this tax recognised in ow. law ; you find its operation so limited by the very conditions under which it exists that there is no reason to apprehend the disturbing of a fair settlement of these duties, if once made ; and you will, I think, be of opinion that this is a fair and right tax to adopt for itself, and that it is one which in other respects meets, in the best, safest, and most effective manner, the feeling which is I know is pre valent in this house—that the present operation of the in come tax is severe upon intelligence and skill as compared with property. (Hear, hear.) I propose to retain the present scale of consanguinity, with one change. (Oh, oh.) We cannot go into that now, because the emotion of the hon. member might produce a duellum between him and me that would inconveniently cross the course of my gene ral statement, and we must adjourn th e consideration of that to another time. (Hear, hear.) We propose to re tain the present scale with one mitigation. Under that scale relations of affinity are treated as strangers—a son in-law and a daughter-in-law pay a duty of 10 per cent. We propose to place them on the footing of relations by blood. (Hear, hear.) We propose that the exemption of real property should no longer exist, subject to the condi tions lam about to mention. The Government propose that the exemption of settled personalty should no longer exist, and as we abolish the exemption, I now come to the question— a most grave one for the Govern ment to consider, and which they have carefully con sidered—would it be just that all descriptions of pro perty, personalty and real property, should be charged at the same rate_of _duty to the legacy duty ? Our opinion is that it ought not, and we think that a dis tinction ought to be taken, but not taken exactly as here tofore. It is obvious, when we regard the burdens upon property in this country, that there is a great mass of tax ation that attaches to property which may be roughly called—l do not know whether the term is legal—rateable property, which includes along with real property a great amount of leasehold, copyhold, and so forth, which is not real property, but which is subject to the burdens of real property, which is subject to taxation by the income tax, which is subject to the land tax, though in a less degree, which is subject to the extra charges on the transfer of pro perty, and which is subject generally to all the charges that affect visible property as contrasted with invisible property, and which is liable to the great weight of local taxation. There is between these items a sum of 14,000,0001. or 15,000,0001. of taxes laid entirely on rateable property, to which not real property only, not land only, but leashold and copyhold property also are subjected. This property is now subject in both ways to the legacy and probate duties, and to all the burdens incident to real property. The Government propose to amend the whole foundation of the law, by striking a new distinction, and by saying that whatever exemption or partial advantage shall be given to real property shall be given in conjunction to other property which is now subjected to special bur dens. We propose, therefore, to abolish the effect of set tlement, so that the person who succeeds to personal property will pay according to his interest. He will pay upon the capital, if he succeeds to the capital, and if he succeeds to a less interest he will pay on the value of that less interest. The Government, then, thinking it just that a less amount shall be taken from rateable property than from property that does not pay these special burdens, have to ask in what way that distinction can best be struck. It has long been` the policy of this country—the result of a measure accidentally taken, but not the less beneficial — that visible and rateable property should be in a manner taxed in the form of an annual charge. Now it would be obviously highly inconsistent, while you are relieving the average annual burden, to make up for it by laying a heavy charge upon the capital. For the Government would then force and accelerate by the pressure of fiscal enactments changes in the tenure of this property, and that acceleration would be, in my opinion. not only unjust, but most cruel and mischievous in a social point of view. We think that if anything in the nature of a distinction is taken in the legacy duties in favour of rateable property as against the other descriptions of property, the fairest mode in the case of an estate would be found to be this—that the successor to real property should be in all cases taxed upon the life interest only, and on a minor interest if he has only a minor interest. It is difficult for me to enter upon a full discus sion of all the reasons that have led us to that conclusion. The question is very much connected with the great diffi culty of any attempt to ascertain the capital values of real property. As a matter of fact, under the social arrangements of this country, our great estates are settled estates. Leaving this subject, however, for future discussion, it is our view that our proposal ought to include the legacy duties, and that some remission ought to be granted to property which is now subject to a great weight of peculiar and exceptional taxation ; and we think that the best mode of framing that provision would be to charge the succession of rateable property upon the life interest after the deduction of incumbrances. We propose that the duty should be leviable, as was proposed by Mr. Pitt, in eight half-yearly instalments. In cases where there is a succession to a life interest, our proposal would be that the tax should drop in the case of a new successor before the new instalment is payable ; but in the case of a succession in fee the whole will be paid, and if death occurs before the remaining instalment is paid the duty will be a debt to the Crown against the estate. That is our proposal with regard to the legacy duty. I now come to the results which we anticipate. The produce in the first year will be small. We do nct propose to charge the new duty . upon any succession anterior to the period when the committee shall adopt the resolution. The law allows 12 months for the payment of the legacy duties, and it will be impossible to fix the payment of the duty upon rateable property, if the committee should adopt it, until after me of the ordi nary periods of rent day. The duty in personalty cases will come in more quickly, but I cannot- reokon upon a larger receipt fr om th e a lt era ti on o f the legacy duties for theu r yeare 1853-54 than 500,000/. additional duty from this _ _ subsequent y e a rs th e a m ount will be greatly enlarged. I have no objection, as far as I am able, to state the results of my investigation as to future years, and I think I do not exaggerate when I say, that this tax, if it is adopted by the committee, while it will add 500,0001. to the income of the present year 18534addan • crease of 700,0001. t o th e year 1854-5, 400: will 0001. more to the year 1.855-6. and 400,0001. more to the year 1856-7, making a total addition to the permanent taxation of the country of not less than 2,000,0001. per annum. (Cheers.) And this I must remind the committee is a tax which will leave wholly untouched the intelligence and skill of the country. (Cheers.) It is a tax that gives the relief, and of theand more than the relief that you aim at by the re-construction income tax, but does it without the dangerhrs (Cheers.) would nec essarily attend that re-construction.e Mr. DISRA_ELL—Does that apply t o the three .) king doms? Th e CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER.—It i s a general change of the law in the present legacy and probate duties, and one which takes no cognizance at all of one kingdom or the other. One great object of our financial policy would be the equalisation of the spirit duties be tween the three countries. It is, however, a very difficult problem. It is very doubtful whether it will ever be en tirely attained, but such an approximation to it as would stop smuggling might, perhaps, be reached. It is quite plain that such an equalisation cannot be obtained at pre sent by a reduction of the spirit duties in England. You must take the English duties as the ruling point to which the other must be raised. In the present year we do not propose to make any change iu the English spirit duties, for that question is so much mixed up with the licensing system, and would involve so great a change in the princi ple of licenses in populous districts, that for the present the English spirit duties must stand over. But the Government are of opinion, after a careful con 13ideration with respect to Scotland, that there is no reason why, in the case of Scotland, there should not be moderate there in the duty upon spirits. I believe hat an increase of the duty, confined within clue i. o undg, would not be opposed' to public opinion in Scot land, or unaccetitable in Scotland. (Hear.) An increase on the duty upon home-made spirits would render neces sary an adjustment of the duty upon colonial spirits, Which I only mention now without going into details. Our proposal will be that a duty of ls. be added to the 3s. Bd. a-gallon upon Scotch spirits—the malt drawback to remain as at present. The consumption in Scotland is 7,170,000 gallons. The actual revenue is 1,315,0001. The expected revenue is 1,633,000/., which is a gain of 318,0 001 . I may here stop to congratulate a noble lord opposite (Lord Naas) on having attained a triumph. I ought to have re served this until I came to Ireland, but his victory is at length achieved. We propose to relieve the distiller, and likewise the time of this house—(a laugh)—by making an allowance for waste upon spirits in bond. (Hear, h ear.) That allowance for waste will be in Scotland 40,0001., which will give the net increase of revenue from the increase of the duty upon spirits in Scotland 278,0001. The Government have also anxiously considered this ques tion as it regards Ireland. It is quite plain, I am afraid, that an allowance for waste upon spirits in bond will entail a dimunition of revenue; in fact, that will amount to a considerable proportion of the revenue arising from the duty upon spirits. At present the spirit duty in Ireland is extremely low in comparison with the duty in the two other countries. There has been found to be a great difficulty as to the means of levying the tax, and we think it would not be safe to levy an additional tax of ls. a-gallon upon home-made spirits in Ireland. But we have looked carefully t o the means at our command for enforcing the levying of this tax. In Ireland there is a revenue police, which has hitherto had the exclusive charge of enforcing this duty. But there is also maintained in that country at the public cost a large force, the constabulary, which has had no share what ever iu giving information to those who have been engaged in levying the spirit duties. We contemplate a change in the relation of these two forces. I cannot say whether it will be by an absorption of the one force into the other, or in what way it will be done, but the constabulary will in some manner give their assistance in the levying of the duty upon spirits. We think we may fairly propose an increase of duty of Bd. per gallon on Irish spirits—namely, from 2s. Bd. to 3s. 4d., subject to the deduction of 40,0001., the allowance for waste, spirits in bond. This will give us a gross gain of 238,0001. upon the consumption of Irish spirits, but, deducting the allow ance for waste of 40,0001., we have a net gain of 198,0001. That gives from both countries—Scotland and Ireland —an increase of 476,0001. But it is necessary that I should make an allowance for waste in England, not for the sake of English distillers, but for the sake of Irish and Scotch distillers, with whom it is a great object to bond their spirits here. (Hear, hear.) There will therefore be an allowance of 40,0001. for waste in bond in England, which will leave a net gain from the increased duty upon spirits of 436,0001. a-year. (Hear, hear.) There is one very small augmentation of revenue that I propose, and that is the revenue upon certain classes of licenses. If the committee examine the present scale of licenses, they will see that they bear very unequally upon the minor and the greater tradesmen ; upon some it is uniform, as upon gro cers and teadealers, and they pay the same, whether they pay rent to the vitae of Si. or 5001. We do not propose to take up the more important questions as to the licenses which are connected with the sale of spirits, wine, and beer, but we propose, in regard to the licenses of brewers, dealers in tea and coffee, tobacco, and soap, to make an additional scale of licenses, raising them at the upper end of the scale to an ad valorem, value. The gross increase of revenue arising from licenses is 113,0001. The whole amount of increased taxes which we propose to levy, and which will come into the accounts of 1853-4, is—income tax, 295,000/. ; legacy duty, 500,000/. ; duty on spirits, 436,000/. ; licenses, 113,0001., which amount to a total of 1,344,000/.—(cheers)—which, with the anticipated surplus of 805,0001., will give a fund of 2,149,0001. available for the remission of taxation. (Cheers.) I cannot proceed further without stating the nature of our intentions with regard to Ireland. The committee have found that we propose to make the income tax payable in Ireland for a moderate term, and at a descending rate, as in England, and that we propose to levy an increased tax of Bd. on spirits in Ireland, which may be a net tax of 6d. or 7d. a gallon, after allowing for the waste of spirits in bond. But I have now to refer to that case which I lately men tioned of rent-charge formed by the consolidated annui ties. It was the opinion of the Government that it was impossible for them to arrive at a final decision upon that important subject. They represent a capital of 4,500,0001. of public money, and in dealing with them the Govern ment must have regard to the actual situation of Ireland, recovering as it is from a season of the deepest distress, and having also regard to the harmony of the relations be tween the two countries, the Government thought they could not come to a final decision till they had considered the general plan of finance which it was their duty to re commend, and its bearing upon Ireland. They now re rommend a measure which, if you adopt, as I trust you will, will advance us one great step towards establishing an equalization of taxation between the three countries. (Cheers.) It is true that the income tax is of temporary duration, and that you will show by levying it that there is a bond fide intention and a rational prospect of equalis ing the taxation. But, at the same time, it is important that you should consider the great necessities of a portion of that country, and when you come to consider these things it will be plain that the disposition of Parlia ment will be to adopt large and generous measures, and not consider this as a mere question of money. You will consider this—you will consider all that it represents—the recollections of the famine, the peculiar character of that awful visitation, the feeling of England to Ireland, and of Ireland to England, whatever made a more kindly tone between the two countries, and made this debt less of a national credit or an d debtor account. The Govern ment have determined to make a large proposition. The 4,500,0001. of consolidated annuities represent 1,500,0001. of debt that strictly belongs to the establishment of the poor law in Ireland. That was a great social and na tional good—a great and vast good to Ireland. But every good to Ireland is also a good to England. (Hear, hear.) The other 3,000,0001. consist of debts entirely con nected with the famine. A committee of the other house of Parliament have sat on this subject, and the have recom mended a remission of 2,000,0001. of this taxation. Sir, the plan of the Government, after maturely considering the whole question, is to propose to Parliament that, from and after the 29th of last September, the consolidated annui ties shall be wilt-dig wiped away. ((boor from tho Irish members.) They propose that the whole sum due from Ire land to England shall be remitted. In remitting these charges, and in proposing an income tax upon Ireland, you will make a great stride towards that, the advantage of which I hardly know how to appreciate with reference to bringing the two countries towards the establishment of the principle of equalised taxation. On that subject I need only add, because I am asked what I mean to do with the arrears, that arrears in respect to consolidated annuities due to the 29th September will be paid as they would have been if the law had continued in force. On the other hand, nothing will be collected which has become due since the 29th of September—and any money which has been so col lected will be returned to those who have paid it, so as to take care that the non-paying classes obtain no advantage over those who have paid. (Hear.) We are inviting you to remit a capital sum, which was nearly 4,500,0001., and is still above 4,000,000/., and to remit an annual charge of 245,0001. Three-fourths of that amount would continue for 40 years, and one-fourth for from 10 to 30 years. The taxation we propose for Ireland would in the first two years be considerably higher than the taxation we propose to remove but if we look to the time when, as I say, Par liament will be in a position to part with the income tax, Ireland would enjoy, and for a long term of years, a much larger remission of consolidated annuity than it would be subject to additional burthens in the shape of the spirit duty. So much for the case of Ireland : and now I have done with that most offensive part of my task, the imposi tion of taxation, I feel—as it is said men are wont to feel, and as some of us have felt—when they have come an up-hilljourney to the top of the Alps. Now I have got to the downward road, and the plains of Italy are before me. (Hear, hear.) I come to consider the more agreeable subject of the remission of taxation—that remission of taxa tion which up to this moment, not from obstinacy, and not from petulence, but from a conviction of our pub lic duty, we have thought it right steadily to decline ac ceding to. (Hear.) The first remission of taxation I shall propose has reference to the Excise department. It is im possible to deny that there are great evils connected with the soap tax. (Cries of " hear, hear.") In the first place, the system of drawbacks, which is a system incident to the use of soap in our manufactories, entails an immense loss. In the second place, this is an article of taxation which is both injurious to the comfort and to the health of the people. (Hear.) In the third place, this is an article on which the pressure of the tax is so severe that, notwith standing the general wisdom and fairness with which your Excise laws are administered, notwithstanding the draw back you grant on exportation, your productive power is crippled. (Hear, hear.) You cannot compete with the foreigner—your export trade dwindles day by day—and gentlemen who have come to me to represent the case with respect to soap well-informed gentlemen have stated that if we only take that bold measure with respect to the soap tax which we recommend, over and above the entire rate of duty the consumer of soap would benefit to the extent of no less than 25 or 30 per cent, in consequence of the cheapened production. (Hear.) Therefore for every penny of duty we ask you to surrender we feel that we are giving you double that advantage. There is one other point to which I cannot but feel that I must advert. The question of the African slave trade is one which excites different feelings. We have but one feeling with respect to the extinction of the slave trade, but there is a difference with respect to the measures to be taken for that extinction. Some have thought the means of force used are unavailing, but that the - promotion of le gitimate commerce would be the most satisfactory, the most effective, and the most desirable of all instruments you can apply. (Hear, hear.) It may be said there is a wide interval between the premises and the conclusion if I say, in order to extinguishthe slave trade repeal the soap tax. But a connection more intimate than this any gen tleman cannot well imagine. The map would show how the rivers of Africa might become depots for the trade in palm oil. The quantities you may receive from that source are almost immeasurable. There are the great ma terials for a trade which, if you only relieve it from checks, will show that the energy, the capital, and the intelligence of the country are as well entitled to carry away the palm in this particular—(hear, hear, and a laugh)—as they show themselves to be in so many respects. The gross receipt from the soap duty is 1,397,0001.; the drawback, 271,0001.; the net receipt, 1,126,000/.; the cost of collection, 15,000/4 the net loss, 1,111,0001. But with reference to the general necessity for fixing a time to commence the remission of duties, the most convenient time for this purpose in regard to the soap duty was the sth of July. But there was al ways a power of keeping in bond if it were thought fit to do so. There is already a sum due with reference to the quarter just expired of 140,0001., and before the present quarter is out probably 200,0001. will be due. We have to credit this year 340,0001., and the net loss for this year will be 771,0001. I come next to the division of the stamp duties. It is not possible for the Government, with all the means at their service, to deal with all the articles they would wish. There are articles—suchas fire insurance and marine insurance—on which they would gladly, if they could, grant remissions of taxation. But they have made the best choice in their power. One subject that naturally presented itself to them, both in connexion with the in come tax, and likewise as bearing directly as a tax on pru dence, and bearing especially on the poorer classes, is the present tax on life assurance. It bears very heavily on the poorer classes, though not severe in itself. At present it a with loss or relief article w i which be 29 i , n Oo i o t / s . amounts to s. 6d. per cent. We propose to reduce it from 2s. 6d. to 6d. The produce is 40,0001.—the imme diatepstraotpeosies mostei t to pre W sen e t un satisfactory, and that is stamps on receipts. This is aduty which does not grow as it ought with the transactions of the country, a duty which is evaded wholesale, and a duty which I must say entails very considerable inconvenience. It is not a mere in i queston of charge, but the ne cessity of dealing the particular papers, stamped with particular amounts, whichyou have to send and get as occasion requires, are all little things which enter very much into the question of inconvenience. (Hear. hear.) What we propose is, to make an entire adopt a system analogous to the system found so conve nient to the public with reference to postage—namely, that of penig 'stamps. -We propose by a penny stamp on rostrum unts for any pament in money, as contrasted with negotiable instruments, to 'make such payment valid. Though the first loss to the revenue will not be incon- rk THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, APRIL 19, 1853. siderable—namely, 155,0001., it is not a loss without hope of recovery. (Hear, hear.) We think that is a loss to which the committee, for the sake of so great a conve nience, would be disposed to accede to. [Mr. Bright put a question.] The penny stamp would be necessery to con stitute a valid document. As you have to pay 3d., 6d., is. at present, so we propose to annex the single condition of affixing a penny head as sufficient. We propose to make a change with respect to those indentures of apprentice ship which are known as indentures without consideration. This is a duty which produces very little, from the charge being too high ; from 20s. we propose to reduce the duty to 2s. 6d. The next question is popular with the majority —unpopular with the minority. It is the case of the at torneys. (A laugh.) I must confess that I don t think the vote of the House of Commons taken upon this ques tion would have justified the Government in proposing a remission of this duty, because we feel strongly that a vote of the House of Commons given on a particular duty, is given necessarily on considerations attaching to that par ticular duty, and without reference to the comparative and relative claims of others. (Hear, hear.) But we do think, in consideration of legislative changes which have lately been made, and which have tended, by indirect as well as direct action on the law, to diminish the business of at torneys, that there might be a remission of taxation. What remission should it be ? We are not satisfied with the proposal made by the profession. The profession is subject to three charges. The first is on admission to practice, which is small. The charge for the annual cer tificate is 121. for the metropolitan solicitors, and 81. for country solicitors ; and the charge for articles of clerkship is put at the enormous amount of 1201.—a charge on capi tal paid by solicitors in anticipation, though they may die, though they may turn out incompetent. The profession said, " Take the tax *f the annual certificates for those who are in the profession ; leave those who are to enter to pay precisely the same." (A laugh.) We don't think that would be a fair mode of dealing. (Hear, hear.) Having made up our minds that we may propose a remission of probably about 50,0001., we propose to reduce certificates from 121. and 81. to 91. and 61., and articles of apprentice ship from 1201. to 801. I come now to the question as to advertisements. (Hear, hear.) With respect to that question I hope that the committee will not consider that it indicates any disrespect for the judgment to which the majority of the house arrived, if having the same object in view, and desiring to bring about some or a more effective classification of taxation, we have been led by our examinations to believe that there is a better mode of proceeding than that which the house adopted, think it our duty respectfully to submit that mode of proceeding to the deliberate consideration of the committee ; and it is right I should say that the plan I am about to state was a plan which the Government had adopted at the time of the debate on Thursday last. (Hear, hear, hear.) It may perhaps, be said, " Why did you not say so ?" My answer is this—that it was from no motives of mortification, that it was from no desire to practise an undue reserve ' • it was because we feel that, if the Executive Government is, with ad vantage to the country, ordinarily to discharge the func tion of the initiative with respect to finance, it is absolutely necessary that the strictest silence should be observed —(loud cries of " Hear, hear")—not in contempt of pres sure, but yet, notwithstanding pressure—till the time arrive when the views of the Government shall be disclosed. What we propose with respect to the duty upon advertise ments is this—and financially our proposal comes within a mere trifle (within 20,0001.) of the other. The,present duty on advertisements is 181,0001. We propose to reduce the duty from ls. 6d. to 6d. (A cry of "Oh !" followed by cries of " Hear, hear.") The hon. gentleman could not wait on Thursday last for four days, and now he cannot wait for as many minutes; (A laugh.) May I make that moderate demand on his patience ? It is absurd, and most of all would it be so, to take only the plan of the right hon. gentleman the member for Manchester, who had considered this question, and consider the duty on advertisements alone. You must consider it with reference to the other duties which affect the journals in which those adveitiTe ments appear. (Hear, hear.) I venture to say that, if you repeal the duty on advertisements simply, and leave the duties on the supplements to newspapers as they are, it is very doubtful whether a great part of your reduction will not go into the pockets of newspaper pr o p r i e t ors . You want a large increase in the number of advertisements, but you must take care that you don't subject people to taxation in another form by multiplying their advertise ments. Take the case of the Times. You know it is obliged to limit its advertisements. I will not go into that subject ; but there is a point beyond which, in consequence of the Id. stamp on supplements, and the id. stamp on supplements, it does not pay to insert advertisements, on account of the supplement ; and therefore a time comes when they must have a limit to the advertisements, and put a higher price on them, on account of the supplement. What we propose is this—to reduce the duty on advertise ments to 6d., and, instead of taking off the remainder of the duty on advertisements, to repeal altogether that with which the plan of the right hon. gentleman did not meddle, namely, the id. and stamps on the supplements of newspapers which are used for printing advertisements. (Hear, hear.) And I venture to say the plan we propose is far more sure to secure to the advertiser the benefit of the reduction than the plan which you propose ; because, if you remove the advertisement duty altogether, then when advertisements come into a newspaper, they must either be limited to the present sheet of the newspaper, with the present limited space, and no competition, or they must be liable to that heavy stamp duty which discourages the printing of supplements. The first loss on the adver tisement duty and the supplement stamps will be 160,0001. The only other change we propose is contingent on a bill by which the noble lord the Secretary for the Home Depart ment proposes to effect a material reduction for the benefit of the metropolis. It is proposed to reduce the taxation on hackney carriages. A common hackneycarriage payslOs. a-week. We think there ought to be a reduction. We propose to reduce the duty from ls. sd. a-day to ls. a-day, which will give a relief of 26,0001. The relief from the remission of taxation on the division of stamp duties will be 418,0001. With reference to the point of the duty on advertisements, I hope that, in addition to the proposition I have stated as regards the bearing of the plan proposed here and the bearing of that proposed by the Government, the committee will ha willing to considor the effect that la likely to be produced by sweeping away all branches of the revenue, if they are not revenue of a description which does not seriously interfere with or constitute a burden on the community. I really don't see how it is possible to maintain any duty on fire and marine insurances—any duty on a great many articles which I fear have over long been the objects of taxation—if the arguments against the present advertisement duty are to be pushed to such a length as to stop nothing short of absolute remission. We propose, also, to the committee that they should attempt to make a reform of the assessed taxes. That is a propo sition which cannot fail to be acceptable ; but the opera tion is not an easy one. If it is to be successful it must proceed on three principles—the abolition of what are called the progressive duties ' • the abolition of what are called compositions ; and, lastly, the abolition, or the almost abolition, of exemptions, and the substitution of rates and taxes which shall be few, simple, and as nearly as possible uniform. What the Government proposes is, that instead of the present duties on men-servants, be ginning at a minimum rate of 11. 6s. 6d., and running up through a great variety of rates, a uniform rate of one guinea on servants above 18 years of age shall be levied, and of 10s. 6d. on servants under 18. Upon private carriages we propose, instead of such charges of 61. 12s, 41. 15s. 6d., and 31. lla. 6d., to charge 31. 10s., 21., and 15s. The duty on carriages let for hire, such as post chaises, will remain at 3/. ; but the particulars relating to this subject will be more explicitly stated in the resolu tions. The duty on horses, beginning at 11. Ils. 74., runs up to a great variety of rates. We propose that trade horses shall remain as now, that the duty on ponies shall be 10s. 6d., and on other horses 21s. [An hon. member put a question.] The hon. member asks what we propose with respect to agricultural horses. We propose to leave them as they are now—exempt. (A laugh.) We may be wrong. Exemptions, as exemptions, I do not like ; but it appears to me that the case of agricultural horses is strictly ana logous to that of steam-power on railways. Our object is, irrespective of fear or favour, to propose what we think impartial justice to every class. I have received proposals suggesting the imposition of taxes on steam-power. Of these I need not say they were summarily , dismissed. Whatever my love of symmetry, I don't think it just to remove the exemption of duty which applies at present to horses employed in agriculture. We propose to make a simplification of the duty on dogs, which are not so much taxed as the rest of the community. There are two rates of charge at present on dogs—a duty of 145., and Bs. ; and these we propose to unite at a sum of 12s. The immediate effect of these changes will be a loss of 87,0001. on servants, 95,0001. o n p r i va t e car riages, 118,000 1 , on horses ; but we have a ga i n o f 10,0001. in the case of dogs—so that the !first lo s s by th e rem i ss ion of assessed taxes will be 290,0001. As in the case of stamps, however, our hope is that the first loss will be made up to the re venue. The assessed taxes are levied under 72 acts of Parliament—(hear, hear)—and if the house wants the sys tem of these assessed taxes reformed it must be prepared to support us in the principle of subjecting to moderate duties a great variety of articles. (Hear.) We propose, also, to change a system that does not strictly apply to as sessed taxes, but which is of an analogous character. I allude to the post-horse duties. (Hear.) The case of the post-horse masters is a very hard one. The present system is exceedingly unequal. The duty, which is heavy and burdensome, is levied on mileage, and is subjected to all manner of difficulties in the collection. It is raised by the issuing of tickets taken up at the first turnpike ; and I may state, in the first instance, that I believe the largest postmasters in the kingdom are in London, whose principal traffic is to the railway stations, where there are no turn pikes whatever. (Hear, hear.) Altogether the system is difficult, the duty onerous in its amount, and, as I have said, is unequal in its distribution. We Propose, in deal-, ing with this matter, to take the plan that has been sub mitted to us by the postmasters themselves. Their own proposal was a very fair one, for they were not so much for a remission of taxation as an entire change of the sys tem. They propose that the bulk of the tax shall be levied in the form of licenses, which licenses shall vary according to the number of horses and carriages. (Hear, hear.) In , this way we propose to make a remission of 54,0001. a year in favour of the postmasters. (Hear, hear.) We propose a scheme of duties on the licenses for horses and carriages which will realise a sum of 161,00 01 . a year, giving, as I have said, a remission of 54,000 1 . a year. (H ear hear.) Another change under the head of assessed taxes is pro posed with the view of giving greater facilities for the re demption of the land tax. The present provision of the law for the redemption of the land tax is very stringent, and its operation is exceedingly limited- You may re d eem a tax of 11. levied on the land, by transferring to the Com missioners for the Reduction of the National Debt 225. a year in the funds ; but these are extremely unfavourable terms ; and, instead of recovering 10 per cent. more than the amount of the tax, we propose to reduce it by 17i per cent.—to take 7i per cent. less than the same amount of stock in land. (Hear, hear.) The committee should be aware that any change made with relation to these matters cannot come into operation during the present year ; and if at a future period of the session we should ask the house to pass an act called the Assessed Tax Act, we shall then fix the date for sth October, 1853, and not for sth April, 1853. Out of all these losses of revenue, or commutations of taxes, under this branch of the assessed taxes only 51,000/. of post-horse duty would come into effect this year, and only one-half of it would be charged from sth October. I have still an important branch of remission to mention. There would be a loss of revenue in the plan d proposed with reference to colo nial p osta g e, but on that I Rot enter, as I doubt if any p art of it would com e into the present year. Now, with reference to the Customs duties, I may state that no bra nch of revenue has attract ed more the attention of the. Government, as th e y f ee l that it is here, after all , th at the elasticit y of the p owers of the country have been shown—(hear, hear)—and they think that it is by these powers they are supported in the ' duties. (Hear, hear.) I will first many articles of Customs h mention an article of importance in . whic we can ma ke proposal they make to produce an effective result as regards it is a subject of peculiar susceptibility, and the tax, as doors, whichis almost as peril ousf an agitation out of no change, and that is the article of wine. I refer to this cause o of wine itself—(a laugh)—and because it is desirable that • if the house and the Government think no change can be to the wine duties as certain climates are to the growth s e h d o u til ty d , b th e at el e e p ar ini ly on an o d f t in h t e e h m o g u ih se ly and exp th re e ss Go od: v m e a rnm de i e n nt th (Hear.) There are three plans, any one of which might be followed with regard to wines. One would be to reduce the duty to a low uniform duty of ls. 6d. or 25., or 2s. 6d. the gallon. Now, you cannot do that unless you are pre pared to sacrifice an amount of revenue for the first year of 700,000/., besides an increased difficulty in the drawback on stocks on hand, with respect to which it is not impossible that the Government might form a sturdy resolution in which the House of Commons might afterwards be induced to concur. (Hear, hear.) But whether that be so or not, a loss to the revenue of 700,0001. or more is not to be put in comparison with other objects that the Government have in view. (Hear, hear.) Another plan would be to fix a , duty of several rates on wine of different values, somewhat resembling the duty on different qualities of sugar. B u t if that is attended with difficUlty in the case of sugar, with that hnw of muchw greater leater (Hear, diffi hear.)culty w l o t ul h d as it th n o ot re b e e om a m tte ou n d d a e t d ion in , certainly, that it would admit low classes of wine at a less loss to the revenue. But the Revenue Department would have the greatest difficulty in carrying out such a system ; it would be complex in its operation ; the wine trade, almost to a man, is opposed to it; and rcannot say that public opinion is so much in its favour as to induce us to attempt to carry it into effect. (Hear, hear.) That being so, there is no choice for us but to say that, whatever be our opinion of the operation of the present wine duties, we are unable to propose any change in them at the present time, neither can we see any early prospect of a change hereafter. (Hear.) Igo to the next article which is tea. (Hear, hear.) I w on 't di sc u s s th e r easons that exist for reducing the tea duties. It would be idle to do so, for they are already settled in public opinion. (Hear, hear.) And, as we have agreed to make a reduction in the tea duties, so we have acceded to the general principle recognised by the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) as that of the late Ad ministration, that it would be most unwise to make the reduction to is. by a single leap. (Hear, hear.) It is almost demonstrable, as far as a negative is capable of de monstration, that you cannot have the slightest hope of such an increase of supply as would indemnify the revenue, or even bring loss within moderate bounds, and, what is of yet more importance, secure the main benefit of the reduc tion to the consumer. (Hear, hear.( What we propose is this—to take the first step that was taken by the right hon. gentleman opposite last year, and reduce the duty at once from 2s. 2id. to ls. 10d. (Hear.) We have carefully considered the state and prospects of the supplies of tea. The condition of the Chinese empire at this moment is cer tainly not favourable to such extended supplies as we could wish. We cannot entertain very sanguine expectations that any large addition will be made in 12 months to the quantity available for the wants of this market ; but in the end, we hope and believe, if there be not a chronic state of revolution in China, that, so far as the production of tea is concerned, a short time, a couple of years or so, would be sufficient to put us in possession of a large addi tion to our supply. (Hear.) We propose, therefore, to take the first step as the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Dis raeli) took it, but we propose thereafter to proceed some what more rapidly. (Hear.) We shall take the duty from the date when the house, if it coincides with us in opinion, shall adopt the resolutions. To the sth of April, 1854, it will be ls. 10d., to the sth of April, 1854-5 it will ls. 6d., to April, 1855-6, is. 3d., and from April, 1856, it will be is. (Cheers.) The whole time occupied in effect ing the descent from 2s. 24d. to ls. would be less than three years. We hope, with favourable circumstances, thus to bring in the supply necessary to meet the increased demand, but we could not venture to recommend to the house the adoption of any shorter period for effecting the change. (Hear.) The house must not suppose that this is a change which, if we take a clear and dispassionate view of it, can be effected without a heavy loss to the revenue in the first instance. The amount of remission, indeed, will be enormous. If any gentleman will calculate the differ ence between 2s. 4id. and ls. on the amount of tea con sumed during the last year, he will find it come to 3,000,0001.—a sum much too large to reckon upon recover ing all at once. By the arrangement I have stated the loss for the first year will be 366,0001., for the second ye ar 510,0001., for the third year 454,0001., and for the fourth year 604,0001., making altogether a oss in Customs' re venue in these years of 1,934,0001. (Hear.) But at the same time the loss, we trust, will undergo a rapid and steady diminution. In proceeding to consider more gene rally the state of our tariff, we have been desirous to carry out something like a new revision of taxes, and to apply to it the following general rules:—First, to abolish altogether the duties which are unproductive, except in cases where there may be some special reason on account of their rela tion to other articles ; and, in the next place, to abolish, as far as considerations of revenue will permit, duties on articles of manufacture except such as are in the last stage, and commonly connected with hand-labour, in regard to which cases we have thought it more prudent and proper to proceed in the mode not of abolition, but of reduction, and in these cases we have endeavoured to fix the duties in such a way that they should not reach, as to any class of goods, higher than 10 per cent. on their value. As I have referred to 10 per cent., I may state that we have not thought it right to propose a reduction in the silk duties, which are 15 per cent. The question of the silk duties is mainly a question of revenue, and in regard to it we do not think it is an article th a t has the strongest claims upon our consideration—for, in so far as it is an article into the manufacture of which protection enters, the protection has mainly reference to certain classes of operatives, with re spect to whom it would be the disposition of Parliament t o proceed carefully and cautiously. We desire further whenever it can be done to take the mode of substituting rated duties for duties ad valorem, and to get rid in every case, except in a few instances, where it is important on account of revenue, of the five per cent. Customs' duties made in 1840, which, besides raising duties, greatly complicate the tran sactions of business. (Hear, hear.) We propose, in many instances, where there are at present differential duties in favour of British possessions, to sink those differential duties altogether by lowering the foreign article to the level of the colonial ; but where we are not able to lower the foreign article to the level of the colonial we have not thought it would be considerate in any case to raise the:duty on the colonial. article. (Hear, hear.) Lastly, we have boon desire.. to lower the ditties that itytele on foreign articles of food which enter largely if not into the necessa ries of life, at any rate into the solace and comfort of the people. (Hear.) Now, the application of those rules is this—First, as to articles of food we propose to lower the duty on a number of articles, of which the principal are as follow :—Apples, from 2s. a bushel to &I.; cheese, from ss. to 2s. 6d. per cwt.; cocoa, from 2d. to ld. per pound ; nuts, from 28. to ls. per bushel; eggs, from 10d. to 4d. per 120; oranges and lemons, to &I. per bushel; butter, from 10s. to Se. per cwt. - raisins, from 15s. 9d. to 10s. per cwt. (Hear, hear.) The produce of these articles to the revenue at the present moment is 571,0001.; the immediate relief given by the reduction on the same quantities would be 262,0001,; but, with the allowance which we think may be made for an immediate increase of consumption, the probable net loss will be 185,0001. (Hear.) Besides these articles of food, which are 13 in number, including tea, are 123 articles which we propose to set altogether free from duty, involving a loss of 53,0001., and 133 more arti cles which we propose to reduce, involving a gross loss of 70,0001., but which, with increased consumption, may be taken at 52,0001. (Hear, hear.) The effect of this will be to create a simplification of the present system ; but at the same time I must draw attention to the fact that the changes of ad valorem duties into rated duties will call for greater specification, and the resolutions I shall lay on the table will enable the house, when they come to the consi deration of them, to assist ; the Government in determining whether in any of the cases I have stated it will not be better to adhere to the ad valorem duty. (Hear, hear.) All I now say is, that if the proposal does not wear the appearance of simplicity that may be desired, it is because the change tends to multiply specification. (Hear, hear.) The effect of these various changes in the Customs' duties, as applicable to the year 1853-64, will be to produce a gross loss of 1,338,0001., but a loss which, we trust, will again be reduced by increase of consumption to 658,0001. (Hear, hear.) The remission of taxes we propose as applicable to 1853-54 will cause a gross loss in the Excise of 786,000/, or a net loss of 771,000/4 in stamps, a gross loss of 417,0001., or a net loss of 200,000/.; in post-horses, 27,0001.; in Customs, altogether, the gross amount of 1,338,0001., or a net loss of 658,000/.—(hear, hear)—thus showing a re mission of taxation for the present year of 2,568,0001. — (cheers)—and a loss incurred by the revenue after allow ing for the degree in which the remission will be placed by increased consumption, of 1,656,0001. (Cheers.) There fore, Sir, the state of the account for 1853-54 stands thus : —We have a surplus of 805,0001. We invite you to grant us the means of raising by new taxes the sum of 1,344,0001. —making an available fund of 2,149,000/. We propose to enact, and to take effect at once, a remission of taxes that will entail a loss to the revenue of 1,656,0001. There will remain a surplus slim of 493,0001., of which a portion, ex ceeding 200,0001., will be, not from permanent sources, but money that will not come in again. The committee will be of opinion that it would not be prudent, especially as we have in contemplation a scheme affecting the debt, to pro ceed with a surplus less than this. I have still the import ant duty to discharge of redeeming the pledge which I gave the committee, to the effect that the Government were not Paltering with you nor with the people of England about the income tax, but that when we state we propose to place you in a condition to remove it at a future day, which we are prepared to define, we make that proposal on the basis of calculations which, though they might not be tried as minutely as if they referred to the present moment only, yet, I think, are on a' most safe and secure calculation. (Hear, hear.) First let me present the balance-sheet for 1854-55. We left the year 1853-54 with a surplus of about half a million, a considerable portion of which does not consist cf permanent income. In 1854-55 I give you an additional source of income that will be available. That additional charge will be—on the tea duties, 510,0001. ; on post horses, 27,0001. ; the remainder of the soap duties, 340,0001. ; assessed taxes, 170,000/. ; colonial postage, 40,0001. ll the additional charges which we now invite you to calculate upon for 1854-55 will be 1,087,0001. (Hear.) Then the legacy duty will be available for the second year to the extent of 700,0001..; the 31 per Cents., of which, according to the usual principle of computation, one-half is taken credit for, will give a sum of 312,0001. The second moiety of the extension of the income tax will add to this income 295,0001. Putting these sams together, you will find that the whole additional charge proposed to be made for 1854-5 will be 1,087,000/. • and the additional income which I propose being 1,307,0(101., there will be, so far as that year is concerned, a profit which will justify the house, I think, in giving its assent to the remissions which I have proposed for relief. At the same time it is right that the committee should have fully and clearly in view the complete extent of these remissions of indirect taxa tion. They will be as follow :—Soap duties, 1,260,0001. (I am now taking the extent of the relief) ; stamps, 418,000/. ; assessed taxes, 290,000/. ; post-horses, 54,000/. ; total—so far as the Board of Inland Revenue is concerned —1,888,0001. Then, in the Customs' duties the gross loss will be no less than 3,084,0001.; on articles of food—butter, cheese, and so on-262,0001. ; on minor duties, 120,000/. ; or a total relief under the head of Customs' duties of 3,466,0001. (Hear, hear.) Adding to these various amounts the small sum I have described under the head of colonial postage-40,0001.—the entire amount of remissions of in direct taxation to which the Government now invite the committee to assent will be not less than 5,384,0001. (Cheers.) With the remission of indirect taxation we propose to combine the bringing about a stat e o f thin g s, or the rational prospect of a state of things, in which you can, if you so please, really part with the incom o e tax. (Hear, hear.) Let me represent to you theeestate this accounts which sums up and winds up theo. indirectwhl f h protracted statement. The remissions to a gross tax ation proposed amount, as I have justexplained, which began in 1 ,an have been made in late years, which were renewed on a very large scale in 1845, 1846, we find that these remissions—in terms, some of . them of 11 loss of 5,384,000 1 . in five or six years, but in the mean Looking back to the remission m s which years, some of them . we have found en m or ea e r :g h h e t ar y . e ) ars T — h h e a e v ff e e co ot mofplseuteehly remissions recovere recovered to be two-fold—first, that upon the arti cularpto the extension and invigora summere,r,eonpaebralintignghim to increase his particul ar n of various articles ; secondly, that upon the rm trade of the country, and in that way extend ing e t g tc h ieoon e nn m esruo s e am e fel f l otp v clin e e t e eis s nou v . and widening the means of consumption of the great body of the people, and so in a still more powerful manner replacing the loss occasioned by remission. (Hear, hear.) We assume that what has happened before will happen again • that these remissions of indirect taxation, which. are analagous with the remissions which have been made heretofore, will, as these former remissions have done, re place themselves in about the same time— (hear, hear) — and I therefore assume that, so far as these remissions are concerned, you will, by the expiration of the income tax, find these taxes very nearly in amount what they now are. I will not enter into the question of what taxes you may think proper to repeal or reduce in the interval. It is suffi cient for me to provide for the remissions which I now pro pose, and in the proposition of which I do not invite you to undermine, but on the contrary, I ask you to increase the stability of the financial system of the country. (Cheers.) Well, then, how are we to attain a rational prospect of being able to part with the income tax in 1860? The country after so many announcements that have been made to it from time to time That the income tax was to be parted with, has become, doubtless, incredulous on the sub ject, and may, perhaps, conceive that we are aiming at a fictitious and undeserved popularity when we seek to show that by the effect of indirect taxation Ire can enable the house to supersede the income tax ; but the statements be fore the committee, the committee and the country can form their own judgment on them. (Hear, hear-) The amount of the income tax, as we have it now, is 5,556,9001. —this amount will be increased, as I have proposed, by ti:e addition of 590,000/. The gross amount, therefore, of this duty, so increased, will be 6,140,0001. I will not enter into a detail of its composition, and of the descending rates, but, taking the tax at 6 ,140,0001., let us inquire in what condition Parliament will stand with referenee to the part • ing with so large a sum of money. It will stand thus :—ln the first place there will be, as additions to the permanent sources of income—legacy duty, 2,000,000/. ; sp i r it s, 436,0001.; licenses, 113 , 0001 .; ma ng a total of 2,549,000/. towards the fund which we must provide in order to put Parliament in a position, if it should so think fit, to pert with the income tax. (Hear , hear.) Well, then, we come to the anticipated reductions of charge, which of course will be as effectual to the purpose in view as positive jam. tions to the revenue. (Hear, hear.) The first of these re ductions of charge is that on the Three-and-a-Quart er per Cents., which we owe to the wise'measures of the right hon. member for Cambridge in 1842 ; that will bring to the account 624,0001. Bad as is our case with regard to the national debt, and loath as I am to encourage extravagant expectations in that quarter, yet it must be recollected that by the regular application of surpluses, and by the lapse of annuities, we in a small way operate from year to year, both on the capital debt and on the charge. (Hear, hear.) Look back for the last 11 years, and you will find that since 1842 we have reduced the charge of the national debt, irrespective of greater operations, by 80,0001. per annum. I will assume this to continue, assuming, at the same time, that whatever the pressure upon our finances, and whoever may , hold the reins of Government, that we shall always think it one of our main public duties—the very first of our duties—to make ample provision for the efficiency of the public service and the credit and honour of the country. (Hear, hear.) I will assume, I say, that we shall continue to have the same fund appli cable to the yearly reductionof the charge which we have had heretofore, and taking this at 80,0001. per annum for the eight years up to 1861, this will give you a sum of 640,0001. Adding this reduction of charge, which may be reasonably expected, to the sum s t o b e created by the new means of taxation—which latter I have stated to be 2,549,0001.—we shall have an aggregate total of 3,813,0001. Then, in 1859-60, there come falling in the heavy burdens of the Long Annuities and of another large portion of our terminable annuities, which together will operate a relief of 2,146,0001. Adding this amount to the sum of 3,813,600/., which I have already stated, you will find that, between the additional sources from taxation, and the reduction of charge which will accrue in the interval, and the falling in of the Long and other Annuities at the expiration of the period I have named, there will be an available increase of means at the disposal of Parliament, should the present plan of the Government be adopted, to no less an amount than 5,959,000/., against the 6,140,0001. of income tax, which will be the total amount of that tax at that period. (Cheers.) Thus, if the committee has followed me, they will understand that we stand on the principle that the income tax ought to be marked as a temporary measure (hear, hear) ; that the public feeling that relief should be given to intelligence and skill as com pared with property, ought to be met and may be met ; that the income tax in its operation ought to be mitigated by every rational means compatible with its integrity, and above all that it should be associated in the last term of its existence, as it was in the first, with those remissions of indirect taxation which have so greatly redounded to the profit of this country, and have set so admirable an example—an example that has already in some quarters proved contagious to the other nations of the earth. (Hear, hear.) These are the principleson which we stand, and the fi g ures. I have shown you that if you grant us the taxes Which we ask, the moderate amount of 2,500,0001. in the whole, a much less than that sum for the present year, you or the Parliament which may be in existence in 1860, will be in the condition, if you so think fit, to part with the income tax. (Hear, hear.) lam almost afraid to look at the clock— (cheers) —shamefully reminding me, as it must, how long I have trespassed on the time of the house. (Cheers.) All I can say in apology is, that I have endeavoured to keep closely had before me "—i mmen sum spatiis confecimus 93 quor, Et to the topics which I jam tempus equum fumantio solvere cella." These are the proposals of the Government. They may be confidence that it will be admitted that we have not sought approved, or they may be condemne d, but I have this full to evade the difficulties of the position—(hear)—that we have not concealed those difficulties eitherfrom ourselves or from others—that we have not attempted to counteract them by narrow orflimsy expedients—(hear)—that we have prepared plans which, if you will adopt them, will go some way to close up many vexed financial questions, which, if not now settled, may be attended with public inconvenience, and even with public danger, in future years and under less fa vourable circumstances—(hear)—that we have endeavoured, in the plans we have now submitted to you, to make the path of our successors in future years not more arduous, hut mere easy—(hear)—and Im..y he p.rmittod to add, th.t. while we have sought to do justice by the changes we pro pose in taxation, to intelligence, and skill, as compared with property, while we have sought to do justice to the great labour community of England by furthering their relief from indirect taxation, we have not been guided by any de sire to put one class against another. We have felt we should best maintain our own honour, that we should best meet the views of Parliament, and best promote the inter ests of the country, by declining to draw any invidious dis tinction between class and class, by adopting it to ourselvs as a sacred aim to diffuse and distribute the burdens if we must—and the burdens, i f we can—with eq ua l andimpar tial hand; and we have the consolation of believing that by proposals such as these we contribute, as far as in us lies, not only to develope the material resources of the country, but to knit the various parts of this great nation yet more closely than ever to that throne and to those in stitutions under which it is our happiness to live. The right hon. gentleman resumed his seat amid loud, long continued, and general cheering. The CHAIRMAN having read the resolutions which had been put into his hands by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. DISRAELI asked on what day the right hon. gentle. man proposed to take the discussion on them ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that he should lay the whole of the resolutions on the table, and proposed to have the discussion on them on Monday next, taking the income tax first, the legacy duty next, and the spirit duties third. Mr. HUME said that the speech of the right hon.gentle man was so extensive that it was impossible, without some consideration, to weigh its disadvantages and its advan tages. There was this great point about the statement, that it manifested the determination to carry out the principles of free trade, but he deeply regretted the manner in which the question of the income tax had been taken up. He was satisfied that the taxation of the country would never be placed on a proper footing until a property tax to a large extent, and justly regulated, became a permanent source of revenue. From such a tax eight or nine millions a-year might be easily raised. He regretted, too, that any increased taxation should have been proposed, considering as he did the expenditure which gave rise to that increased taxation worse than useless. (Hear.) He thought con tinuing a tax for nine years was almost making it a per petuity without giving the house the advantages of de ciding whether or not it should be so. If they were to add to the taxation, he must express his regret that they had not adopted a simple, easp, and possible mode of raising the required amount of revenue without one-tenth of the difficulties which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had felt in his budget. Mr. FREWEN hoped the right hon. gentleman would give some explanation of what he meant to do with the land tax. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that under the present system, they might redeem a given amount of land tax, by transferring to the Commissioners of the National Debt as much stock as would produce a di vidend the amount of the land tax and ten per cent. more. What he proposed was, that instead of being bound to give as much stock as would produce the amount of land tax and 10 per cent. more, they might redeem it by giving as much stock as would produce the duty less 74 per cent. ; that was, altogether, 17i per cent, less than at present. Mr. BALL had been prepared to receive the budget of the right hon. gentleman with very great approbation, but ho received it with deep regret, and should do all he could to induce the house to vote against it when it came regu larly before them. When the corn laws were repealed, it was expected that some relief would be given to the agri culturists, and he was exceedingly surprised, therefore, that the right hon. gentleman had neglected to afford them the relief of the repeal of the malt tax. As to the reduction of the duty on tea, the poorer classes would derive no be nefit from it, for it had been ascertained that the greater part of the tea that was consumed was purchased in quan tities from a quarter of an ounce to a quarter of a pound. The late Government was wrecked on the budget of the right hon. gentleman below him, and it was not unlikely the present Government might be wrecked from the same cause. Mr. MAGUIRE understood that, as to the advertisemen , duty in England, there was to be a remission of is., so that it would be 6d. only, instead of ls. 6d. But the advertise ment duty in Ireland was but ls. He should wish, there fore, to know what the duty was to be in future. In Ire land there was no such thing as a supplement to a paper known, and he believed that even in London, too, the Times alone published a supplement. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was under stood to say, that, with respect to the a dvertisement atthe d s u am ty e , he was willing to compound for it in Ireland amount as in this country. Mr. COBDEN wished to know whether the right hon. gentleman proposed to remit the stamps on all supplements, or whether he meant to put the stamp on supplements with news. The CHANCELLGR of the EXCHEQUER said the re mission of the stamp would not extend to supplements that were simply an extension of newspapers. Mr. COBDEN—Did the right hon. gentleman mean that supplements might go by post ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—CertainIy. Mr. COBDEN believe d tha t there was but one news paper in the kingdom that published a supplement full of a dvertisements. Mr. HUME wished the Government would take into their consideration this absurdity—that ships built with foreign timber might be brought into this country free of d ithuty, but timber to build ships h ero cannot be brought in wout paying duty. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was ex tremely sorry to say his want of means, and not his want of will, prevented him from taking off the timber duty. If his hon. friend w ou ld g i ve him 300,0001. or 400,0001. more . he might be abl e t o d o so. (A laugh.) Mr. HUME sa id , th a t i f the levied it w ou ld g i ve 10 , 0 00,0001. 7perty tax was fairly and would enable the Chancellor of the Exchequer to take off the timber duty, and do much more. The house then resumed, and the Chairman reported progress, and asked leave to sit again. SOUTH SEA AND OTHER ANNUITIES COMMU- On the order of the day TATION for BILL the second reading of this bill, .__ would not to the Mr. J. B. SMITH said, h e second reading, if it were not understood that by doing so the house assented to the principle of the measure. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, his reason for desiring that the house should kindly consent to the second reading was, that the question of time was very important for the convenience of parties, as notice must be given to all persons holding South Sea Stock. Mr. HUME objected to the principle of the bill. R e thought they were not in a condition to make such an ex periment as was proposed by this measure. The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Thursday next. COMBINATION OF WORKMEN. On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected to the bill being read a third time, on the ground that the measure was unne cessary. He understood the object of it was to correct a supposed misapprehension of the law on the part of Mr. Justice Erle in a case that was tried before him at Stafford in 1851. It was supposed that he laid it down as the law, that workmen could not legally combine for their mutual protection with a view to keep up the rate of wages or limit the number of hours during which their masters might employ them. He believed the learned judge had stated the law correctly ; but whether that were so or not, the Court of Queen's Bench had stated the law upon the subject quite correctly. The learned judge stated that the law was quite clear, and that workmen had a right to com bine for their own protection, to obtain such wages as they chose to demand, or to gain themselves any benefit ; but a combination to prevent men from working, or for any such purpose, was unlawful. The case afterwards came on before the Court of Queen's Bench, and they laid down the law in the same way. .He could not, therefore, think this bill was necessary. Mr. DRUMMOND said it was very well for the learned gentleman to say the bill was unnecessary, but he had stated no other reason against it. It was to do what was intended by the Remedial Bill introduced by the hon. member for Montrose several years ago. There had been great discussions between the masters and workmen for many years, and Lord Stanley, at that time a member of the house, presided over the committee, and a bill was prepared, with which all parties were satisfied, and which put an end to all disputes. So the matter stood as to the necessity of the case. The bill might be unnecessary for the At torney-General, or possibly for himself, but there had been contradictory decisions in the courts of law. (Hear, hear.) Lord Chief Justice Campbell might lay down the law, but he was not immortal—(a laugh)— and another king might arise who knew not Joseph, and who might decide another way. As a proof that for three months and to persons had got imprisonment the law was not cle ar , n i ne pay the costs, amounting to 3,0001. Al asked by this bili was to have a declaratory statute stating what the law really was . Mr. M. FORSTER opposed the bill. Mr. HUME thought, that as there appeared to be a difference of opinion among the lawyers, it was desirable to pass the present bill to settle the doubt. Mr. HADFIELD supported the bill. The house divided : For the third reading Against it ... ... ... 57 ... 70 Majority against the bill ... ... 13 THE CUSTOMS' DEPARTMENT. Mr. WILSON gave notice that he would. make his state ment on this subject on Thursday at 5 o'clock. On the motion of the same honourable member a bill was brought in and read a first time to consolidate the London and Edinburgh Gazettes. The other business on the paper being disposed of, the house adjourned at a quarter past 11 o'clock. THE FRENCH EMPIRE. The ceremony of presenting the newly appointed Car dinal Morlot, Archbishop o f T ours , w ith the cardinal's hat, took place on Sunday, at the Tuileries. Two court carriages conveyed the new cardinal and his suite to the palace. He was accompanied by Mgr. the Ablegate of the Pope, by one of the noble guards of his Holiness, and by a master of the ceremonies ; and his suite con sisted of the Abbd Malmouche, First Grand Vicar of his Eminence ; and of the Abbds Monceau, canon of Tours ; Etienne, general superior of the seminary at Tours ; Deguerry, curd of the Madeline ; Martin de Noirlieu, curd of Saint Louis d'Antin ; Duplessy, honorary canon of Nevers, curd of Pithiviers ; Mac earthy, Chicollot, and Noirot, Inspector-General of Public Instruction. The cortege alighted at the Pavil lion de Fiore. The cardinal proceeded to a room near the chapel containing the ornaments of his dignity ; and the Ablegate was conducted to the audience of the Emperor, in the cabinet of his Majesty, where the princes of the Imperial Family, the Ministers, and the officers on service were assembled. The ceremony was both gorgeous and impressive. It appears that Louis Napoleon has once more ap plied to the Austrian Government for the remains of the Duke de Reichstadt. His wish is that the remains of the Emperor Napoleon and his son should be trans ported at the same time to the Cathedral of St. Denis. It is probable that this new request will meet with the fate of its predecessors. The Austrian Government has steadily refused to give up the body of the Duke de Reichstadt, which lies amidst the rest of the Imperial family of Austria in the Church of St. Augustine, at Vienna. Every day adds to the number of persons arrested in Paris and the departments. These measures are directed exclusively against the Socialists, and have been caused by a subscription for a loan which MM. Felix Piat, Biochot, and Caussidibre have attempted to get up in France. _Some of the subscription Este have been dis covered, and all the subscribers have been arrested. The legislative body met yesterday ; M. Billault in the chair. The Assembly then commenced the discus sion of the bill relative to the promotion of the superior officers of the navy. The Patrie says :—" The Chartists of London cele brated the anniversary of Robespierre on the 13th. The French refugees were invited to attend, but only Nadaud and a score of Socialists of the lowest class were present." The market for rentes continues to improve, and prices have again advanced, exhibiting firmness, with an upward tendency at the close of business. The Three per Cents. for the account rose 30c., and the Four-and-a-Half per Cents. 40c. ; in the Four-and•a- Half per Cents, for cash no change occurred, but the Three per Cents. advanced 25c. A decline of sf. again took place in Bank shares. The closing prices were : For Cash : Three per Cents., 801. 60. ; Four-and-a-Half per Cents., 103 f. 70c. For the account : Three per Cents., 80f. 60c. ; Four-and-a-Half per Cents., 103 f. 70c. Bank shares, 2,730 f. In the railway share mar ket to-day there was much activity, and an advance in price took place in those securities : in Paris and Rouen to the extent of 20f., and of 13f. in Paris and Stras bourg; most of the other principal lines improved from sf, to 10f. each. The last prices were : Northerns, 917 f. 75c. ; Orleans, 1,050 f. ; Paris and Strasbourg, 853 f. ; Paris and Lyons, 949 f. ; Paris and Rouen, 1,105 f. ; Lyons to the Mediterranean, 812 f. 50c. ; Western of France, 777 f. i Rouen and Havre, 532 f. 50c. ; Bordeaux and Cette, 647 f, 75c. ; Caen and Cherbourg, 635 f. ; Dijon and Besanon, 580 f. SPAIN. We have received in due course the Madrid journals and letters of the 13th, but they do not contain a line of information which had not previously reached us by ex. press or by telegraphic dispatch. The Debats says :—" In the list of the new Spanish ministry figures the name of M. Ayllon, now Spanish Ambassador at Vienna. There is reason to believe that General Lersundi has not consulted him on the subject, and that he is not certain of his consent. The friends of M. Ayllon, who is very well known in Paris, where he was attached to the Spanish embassy, doubt his accept ance of the portfolio of Foreign Affairs. We, in fact, remember that he was some years since named to that important post, but that he refused it." We read in the Union :—" Our letters from Madrid confirm the facts before stated on the subject of the sus pension of the Cortes. The following are more complete details : —The speeches of General Emanuel Concha to the Senate, and of General Prim to the Congress, in the sitting of the 6th, excited great alarm and considerable discontent in the Court, and it is said that they were sent for to the palace in order to be remon strated with. Far from paying any attention to this, General Concha declared that in the sitting of the Bth, he would produce written proofs of the charges which had been made on the malversa tions which had taken place not only on the railways from Madrid to Aranjuez, and from Aranjuez to Al manza, but also on other points of the public adminis tration. His declarations, he said, would tend to com promise some very exalted personages, but nothing should stop him. In the evening the President of the Senate was ordered to read at the very opening of the the degree of suspension, and requested not in i.sorderrdes st: particularly n e. supportl In allow any as in readiness to one to speak, and it appeefarsinfanthtaryt, w of these orders, a company C v n e rt n e t s s i r e n e veral high functionaries, consequencec l ear the hall ()off this th event several both civil and military, we General Schneil, director-general of cavalry, and M. Orvognes, c i v il governor of Madrid. O t h ers received orders to take up their residence in provincial towns, and several were expelled from the Spanish territory ; the names of the latter are not mentioned." ITALY. The Ticino Gazette announces that the Council of State of that canton having asked permission of the Federal Council to devote the 10,000 f. it has sent for the relief of the poor Ticinese expelled from Lombardy, to furnishing those who are willing, with sufficient money to leave the country in order to seek work in foreign parts, the Federal Council has acquiesced in that course. A. letter from Milan of the 13th, in the Opinion of Turin, states that the deputation of Milanese gentlemen who had gone to Vienna with an address suggested to them by Count Gyulai himself, praying for a mitigation of the sequestration decree, has met with an extremely cold reception at Vienna. The Grand Duke of Tuscany left Florence on the 11th for Leghorn, in order to visit the preparatory works in the new port of that city, the execution of which is car ried on with great activity. THE ERICSSON.—This noble ship lies at her dock in Williamsburg, where improvements are being made in the machinery. The main difficulty hitherto encountered has arisen from the want of a perfect connexion of two sections of an air pipe, near the bottom of one of the cylin ders. Though connected by rivets, the working of the engine prevented such a union of the parts as to allow of the full use of the power otherwise available. It is said that it has been determined to substitute a single casting for the defective parts, and that the difficulty will be ob viated at once. This change is now being made. The other engine has been perfect throughout ; and when . both are complete, it is believed that the Ericsson will be in , a much better condition to prove her capabilities.—N ew Yor Herald.