The Sun. — London, England, 1853-05-03 00:00:00

B , reste r ' P 0,4 ric' s P ne t ee r i XBl elflol °l t o g c ar i hy $0 I o lt , CO Die C . oil 0 AO :A "" cietie° and tv the r. : " of toy, ,(1116° e o f c it., 110}, o hiol l , u e o of a t for ge te a claw raf t ' C o d, et ,i her; P 3 I to o large 3 ; °3 8 3, ter u jio, ) f 8 7 " o f Pi e° of il ien Ce a, 110 00 , e til o i r i l t t i i :l3 bet re ti ,, In w i" gitli. INIPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS--(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. The Earl of FEVERSHAM presented a petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Council of York, against the Registration of Assurances Bill. The Archbishop of YORK presented a petition against the opening of the Crystal Palace on Sundays. Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition against the Burghs (Scotland) Bill. The LORD CHANCELLOR laid on the table the second report of the Common Law Commission. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from the merchants of London, praying for amendment of the bankruptcy laws. The Duke of NORTHUMBERLAND presented a petition from Gateshead on Indian affairs. TRANSPORTATION. Earl GREY gave notice that on Friday next he would move that an address be presented to her Majesty, pray ing that no alteration be made in the regulations for the tr ansportation of convicts before a full account of any co ntemplated changes be laid before Parliament. INDIA. Lord WHARNCLIFFE, pursuant to notice, pre sented a petition from the corporation of cutlers at Sheffield o n the subject of the internal improvement and public works in India. The petitioners were one of the most ancient corporations in this country, and of all countries in the world to which the cutlery of England was exported India was the largest consumer. It was, therefore, natural that the cutlers of Sheffield should take a deep interest in any measure affecting India ; hadhe b e li eve d that the prayer of the pet i t i on w hi c h h e to present was in accordance with public opinion in this country. Th e petitioners first pointed out that it wail the imperative duty of the Government of India to promote the cultivation of the soil ; and they sug gested that there should be a more permanent fixing of the land tax. There had been a controversy as to the extent to which this tax pressed upon the Pe?ple and obstructed their progress. The next Point to which the petitioners directed attention was thefinancial proceedings of the Government. One of great difficulties of the Indian Government was, that they had to provide some millions of money ; and, ar a °Ug other methods, they adopted the course of ad vancing money by hypothecation upon the goods of India. Wh en hi s no bl e f r i en d ( t h e E ar l of Ellen b i' is (ir ough) was at th e h ea d o f th e govern ment of India he °k steps to put an end to that practice, and sent a dispatch strongly recommending that it should be dis continued. An order was issued in 1850 which entirely abolished the practice, and it was to be hoped that it would not be revived under any circumstances. It was originally adopted when the company was still a trading r liOration. Si nce th e l as t ac t p ass ed, the trade of India du increased 240 per cent., and it was now to be hoped th at d" the company c ould find means, through the ordi c„ arY channel s , o f rem itti n g their money without resort ;,., - g° so objecti ona bl e a p rac tice as placing themselves 41 position of traders. The next point to which the Petitioners alluded was the most important—it was that °f internal improvement. A good deal had been said on b oth sid es of the question. The Government and the East , ndi a Company said that a great deal had been done 7,14 more was in th e cour se of achievement ; whilst on +. ,"'Le other hand severe criticism said it was a scandal both ,‘" the Indi an government an d t h e coun t ry th a t so littl e ' 4 U• been effected. (Hear.) Neither of these state- Insli ts) he believed, conveyed the correct view of the case. Withi n th e l as t t en years th ere b a d, no doubt, t ee n a great er d es i re to promote i n t erna l i mprovemen t s , :lAA still a ll h ad not been done that ought to have been °l ie. The lower province of Bengal consisted. of a great alluvial tract through which two enormous stre ams of the continent found their way, and it maintained a b ou t 40,000 , 000 o f sou l s. Th ere were v ; ° ° o miles of em b an k men t on th e r i vers , b u t it ;: 843 in a most dilapidated state. Some years ago t_ e onarnission wa s i ssue d f or th e p ur p ose o f exa mining to the embankments, and informing the Government ealOw f ar it was possible to repair and renew them. ue commission was composed of a fourth-rate English ~r , l g ineer, a capta i n i n t h e I n di an serv i ce , an d a fou nd gentleman, and their sole report was that they tho ught th e works i n an eff i c i ent state, an d th ey ,T e gight the b es t thing to be done was to leave them "in - b: is s tate of nat ure ." (A. laugh.) There were some canals, they were so c h o k e d as to be almost useless ; and the n, as to the roads, there was the grand trunk road, m ade about 20 years ago, from Calcutta up the Valley °f the Ganges, 1,450 miles into the interior of the eoun stl7. The expenditure, which had been authorised by re Government, upon this road, amounted to about L 15 , 4 ° 13 ,000/. It was the great military line of communi b—," but there were several wide and deep streams to withinBB and there were scarcely any bridges. Two bridges, 35 miles of Calcutta, had been washed away some years ago, and not a single effort had been made to re aee them_ In the evidence before the committee of ° ; ° , B e of Commons in 1841, upon the roads in experi ence stated, by a gentleman of great experi- Sutlej " l edge, that on one occasion during the from C I treat trunk ' it was thought desirable to send 100 officers a cutta to the scene of operations, to which the had to travelr-: Was a direct line. The officers in Palanquins, and it was necessary u h ave relays of 7,200 bearers, who travelled at the rate of l a four miles an hour ; but notwithstanding all the olit advantages of the trunk road, only 30 of the p i .:,ers arrived at their destination in time. In the cause of Delhi there were two great irrigating canals, , e aSal,, l _ t he East Jumna and the West Jumna. These large gad been taken in hand by the Government, and e ° 41 % had ,utie x i,,been expended on them. The canals in 114 : 1 0 -11 With the Ganges extended, in length over Of th• url dre ,„ d miles. There was no doubt but that wor e ks . ar s .„ ki n d were of the greatest value. It hai ef tqed • as c i i and not without force, that the Government the ha d Could not engage in great works, while from the buT , t 0 bear the expenses incident to heavy wars y ; sate he ion he hadlndian to the matter, that the (Lord Wharncliffe) was convinced, given lo ng had mistaken their inter d est in in no it t e h o a f vin a g ll u - b i g since steadily, perseveringly, sumsan forsp works of s tacles, devoted the necessary Pu blicutility. Company The . time had been, indeed, when the t hat could with difficulty raise the necessary sums ; %oat w as now no longer the case. That these things tuuld be done, and that the people of India were not Wanting in enterprise the following fact would show. '` ll l English engineer had succeeded in building a sus 1511sion bridge over one of the rivers, from resources en tirely unconnected with Government. He had got the t he and the necessary people together for executing ' 4 e work, and, by dint of perseverance, had carried the Matter to a successful issue. t ,,Crhe Duke of NORFOLK here presented to their lord ships her M a j es ty' s re ply, a s se nting to the joint address "I. both houses, requesting her to appoint a royal com- I llis sion to inquire into the existence of corrupt practices lit the borough of Hull and the city of Canterbury.] t The E ar l of ELLENBORO UGH expresse d th e ex :eine satisfa c ti on w ith w hi c h th ose w h o t o ok an inte rest in the a ff a i rs o f I n di a mus t v i ew th e ex tension of at interest generally throughout the country.; and he tlin s ted that the assistance they would receive from adhesion o f p ar ti es so i n fl uen ti a l as those from "ni the no bl e l or d h a d presen t e d a petition, cas Would lead t o b enef i c i al resu l ts. (H ear. ) H e cou ld iIY understand the pleasure with which the petition ore th e a b ol i t i on of the pern i c i ous sys t em o f wanting money in India on the hypothecation of goods at a a System which had interfered greatly with commerce h ad crippled the e nerg i es o f th e honest trader. He nittself a n ti c i pa t e d so certa i n l y th e argumen t s an d skt - B°ll, itself of th e G overnment on t hi s po i n t , th a t h e h a d of t rily issued a no ti ce o f t h e approac hi ng a b roga ti on this ° Practice ; but that step was not well received in kemeontry, and indeed he believed there was no one Th or lir e of the Government of India that gave more a„_°Ugh dissatisfaction to the board of directors ; their oilitr,!hensions, however, had proved to be entirely with ioundation ; and trade was now free to that extent. st:t_uoble friend had adverted very strongly to the unde r the roads--a subject which had been brought fi rst d his (Lord Ellenborough's) notice on the very ab oot a3 ; that he spent in India. He had disembarked ninety miles from Calcutta, and as there was no go o n ste amer to take him forward, he intimated that he would by t h at once by land. This proposal was laughed at w ere to to whom he mentioned it. They said there t oean no roads and if there had been, there were no all tL B o f conveyance, so that if he went he must walk Wasit .tw ay (A laugh.) Six or eight weeks afterwardsit took e eessary for hi m t o procee d u p the country, and him nine da to re are his dauk, though he 1 .8111 - , IL Y t hree palanquins, • s and r though he travelled with tliffeiNgage than ma ci n u y in a cadet. He had found a great I n :nee between the - road in different parts of India. oth I nc Places they were as good as in England, but in eveZanthey were nearly impassable. By means, how geue f the assistance of MrGrey the active postmaster al it they were mailbecome greatly ire' proved, and in a little time 1 _ carts possible to send officers as rapidly as the Wheel b carriages were formerly unknown, VIIII-ue",..°,(the. noble earl) had had his palanquin placed on by instead of being carried, was pushed along, reil, a gi t ° ll means he had increased his speed from four talked ° Seven miles an hour. When the noble lord b, g to of further carrying out railways in India, lie must tan attention his attention to the fact, that diplomatic ar ,‘,B would first be necessary; because there were Ped e th ' e t r e e . Several native states that would greatly im- It had been his (Lord Ellenborough's) tsighnave established an arrangement with all ad tiv p°rinees of the nature of a Zollverein ; and he Fo ote tniaaislul succeeded as to reduce the duties on the principal ea per oderate sum. Not only were the roads in many ye a upon _.fectly crenellated, but there were no bridges, tiiliienicaiet.neLnost important strategetieal lines of coin o Jurona and the or instance, there was a stream between C 111 (1 sto Sutlej, which, when the waters were onsid erin _ „ an army for three days. (Hear, hear.) Suite aste lt,t;_ n e cheapness of labour in India, it was rni 7e,.l sue r" g that the Government should have apa,tohy with regard to public works. We 1- 1144n o ght to something for our civil reputation. Whil e we had one everything 6 for ourselves only AA djn.astiee which had preceded our own had not sas all , neir own wlut /u.,„Be men desired to s, but the wants of posterity. something behind them to coO ut r 'e thei r something he desired that his ri i 'e e rn e eit l i t Y ir :i g lihaeasesitr ,° c e i rna a v ted in the future of India with connected with the permanent good of the !h a l' teboefit.hat nation. At the present moment_ he feared ' h at `llPartial figmentju of all' historians would be 3glli6eell.We were possessors of one of the most 111( hba, r ei nPires in the world and the successors of b although we might have been a nion an °. Aurun lo eua t , st the nobl gze e— _ ornbavinest of soldiers, they would condemn our a(1.1 istrators g been amongla the very meanest of th e dlißef"?._ As-4NVlCLhLeEersh)ad heard with great pleasure muoa of that night, and he trusted that the re marks which had been made would not be lost upon the noble lords who formed the select committee on our In dian territories. The noble lord had spoken of bridges ; but one of the most needed would be three miles long, and would require a million of money to complete it. Now, when they considered how long a bridge, not very far from their lordships' house, had been out of repair, they would hardly wonder at the delay. (Hear. hear, and a laugh.) As for the roads, a friend of his who had just come back from a tour of pleasure in India had in formed him that he had travelled 900 miles from Cal cutta in a wheeled carriage. (Hear, hear.) Her Ma jesty's Government were desirous of adopting the best mode of administration possible. The fact that we were obliged to apply an absolute government to India ren dered the responsiLility upon us all the greater to adopt every me ins in our power of increasing the material hap pi less of the country • and he hoped that as the natives had shown a desire for improvement, the Government would do everything in their power to encourage and avail themselves of that feeling. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH hoped the bridge of which the noble earl had spoken would never be at tempted ; because if they built it upon piers, it would have to be five miles long instead of three. Besides, as they had to dig thirty feet through sand before they came to solid foundation, and as the water was 30 feet deep, the piers would have to be about 100 feet high, so that it was out of the question that a million would be enough for the work. It was futile to suppose that railways could be carried across to Allahabad ; for though the engineers had subdued the land the waters would subdue the engineers. Besides, the rivers were of so shifting a character. Why he had seen bridges in India three-quarters of a mile from the streams they were intended to span. (Laughter_) He was once attempt ing to cross by a bridge and found that it suddenly ended in the middle of the water. (Laughter.) The rivers were so filled with a peculiarly fine sand that a wattle fence would be sufficient to divert them from their course. The Mahomedans had built bridges, and fine ones they were too ; but then they were a long waroff the rivers. (A laugh.) The Earl of ALBEMARLE admitted that he was one of the Indian pessimists ; but he was glad to see the sub ject of roads and bridges at last taken up. Seneca had said that a Roman never conquered but he inhabited, and he never inhabited without making roads to the very limits of his province. He (the noble earl) doubted the practicability of setting aside 10 per cent. for improve ments in India. Twenty millions was the revenue of the country. Ten per cent. upon that would be two millions. and this out of a revenue the normal state of which was a deficit, and which never deviated into a surplus. The bad condition of the public works in India was an item of the grievances which the natives of India laid to the charge of their rulers. He held in his hand statistical papers relating to India, printed for the Court of Direc tors, which showed the amount of the expenditure on public works in India. The amount in 1849-50 was 380,000/. There was a little attempt at mystification here. The return was for 15 years, but the estimate for 1851 was exactly double the expenditure for 1849. The noble baron who presented the petition had called their attention to the trunk road from Calcutta to Delhi, and from thence to Peshawur. Of this road only 965 miles of the 1,423 had been completed, and as far as the statement showed the remainder had not been begun. Then the road from Bombay to Agra was begun in 1840. Its length was 734 miles, but whether it was finished or not was not stated. Here then was the Calcutta and Bombay mail road, which was 1,170 miles, but of this 168 had been previously constructed. In 1845 the court directed that 1,002 miles of road should be con structed for the transmission of the mails. A summary was given of all these roads. They were to be 3,059 miles in length, and to cost 2,964,000/. for construction, and 90,000/. a-year for repairs. All this was to be done, but, after all, what did it amount to ? One-seventh part of the turnpike roads in England and Wales for a coun try seven times as big. He should on a future day move for a return of the number of miles of road fit for the transport of goods by coach, and used for that purpose, in the presidency of Madras, and a similar return for Bombay. The subject then dropped, LUNACY. The Lunatics Care and Treatment Bill, the Lunatic Asylums Bill, and the Lunacy Regulation Bill, were severally passed through committee. BOROUGH OF CAMBRIDGE. The Earl of ABERDEEN moved that their lordships concur in an address presented by the House of Com mons for a commission to inquire into corrupt practices at elections for the borough of Cambridge. He said he need not go into the history of the case presented before the committee of the Commons, but be should content himself with moving that their lordships concur in the address. After a few words from Lord ST. LEONARD'S and Lord CAMPBELL, The motion was agreed to. SOUTH SEA ANNUITIES COMMUTATION BILL. On the motion for going into committee on this bill, Earl GRANVILLE was understood to say that he believed several noble lords wished to speak on this bill, and he suggested that they should do so on the third reading. After a few words from Lord MONTEAGLE, Lord ST. LEONARDS (who, as usual, spoke in so low a tone of voice as to be all but inaudible in the gal lery), was understood to object to the bill as excluding suitors in Chancery, whose funds were in South Sea An nuities or Consols, from the advantages which other classes of holders would have in taking either of three alternatives offered, viz., to take an interest of 31 with a reduction of capital; an interest of 21 per cent., with an addition to the capital; or Exchequer Bonds. He would watch the progress of the bill with great jealousy ; and, he would call upon their lordships to insist on suitors in Chancery being placed in exactly the same position as every other holder. He did not ask more for them, and he would ask no less. The LORD CHANCELLOR referred to detailed ob jections which appeared to have been made by the noble and learned lord, and undertook, in regard to the operation of the bill so far as it affected holders being suitors in Chancery in Consols, that he would do his ut most, by framing special and general order, to meet all the exigencies of the case, and to procure equal justice to suitors. With regard to the operations of the bill, so far as it touched South Sea Annuities holders he con ceived that Chancery suitors would he placed in no un fair position whatever. This was unlike all other com mutation bills in this respect, that it provided that the holders (suitors in Chancery) could decline any of the alternatives offered and select to remain in statu quo, with the same stock, on the same conditions. (So we understood the noble and learned lord.) Lerd ST. LEONARDS was satisfied with the expla nanions which the noble and learned lord had given as to the first point. But on the second point, the noble and learned lord seemed to be under a misappre hension ; for he forgot that justice required that suitors in Chancery should not be subject to an exceptional exclusion applied to no other holders of stock, why add to the misfortune of a suit in equity such an injustice at this ? Their lordships might be sure such a measure would cause immense dissatisfaction and heartburning ; and he would say that he had passed days and nights in attempting to facilitate the course of jus tice in the Court of Chancery, and that he could not but feel that all that time and trouble would be utterly thrown away, if an attempt was made to deal unjustly with the funds of the suitors. Earl GRANVILLE was obliged to the noble and learned lord for his suggestions. This part of the mea sure was, no doubt, experimental, to see how the wind blew on the Stock Exchange; and some slight alterations might be rendered necessary. The bill was then passed through committee, and The house adjourned at half-past eight. HOUSE OF COMMONS--(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair shortly before four o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Lords' amendments to the Nottingham Gas Bill were considered and agreed to. The following bills were read a third time and passed : —Norwich Waterworks Bill, Reading Market Bill, Weston-super-Mare Waterworks Bill. The following bills were considered, and ordered to be read a third time :—Belfast and Ballymena Railway Bill ; Eastern Counties Railway (Woodford and Lough ton) Bill ; Haslingden and Rawtenstall Waterworks Bill ; Leeds Gas (No. 2) Bill ; Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway (Alteration of Capital) Bill ; Price's Patent Candle Company (No. 2) Bill ; Wigan Waterworks and Police Bill. The following bills were read a second time and ordered to be committed :—Barnsley Waterworks (No. 2) Bill, Sidney Sussex Estate Bill, Witham Drainage Second District Bill, Baroda and Central India - Railway Bill. PETITIONS. a ga A i l e r s . t T o y e ß e N pe E e ß ieg pr e e f s t e h n e te c d ry a sta p l e p tit a i l o a n ee f e r n om se L e i d v a 7 s. ool Several petitions were presented from various parts of Scotland in favour of the Public House (Scotland) Bill. Mr. HASTIE presented a p e titi on f rom 42 o ld soldiers, twheopeseenvieesraeglaer war and agewas64, stating th a t th e y wen t th roug h h fought at the battle e of Waterloo, s e t r h v e e y receivedewards () sr tener several years•w wounds n i n d s the a army,eh. Maaendy yetof they whereth d p ern were left without a pension in a destitute condition. petition could n o t be The y therefore The SPEAKER prayed said for relief.th the re ceived, as it prayed for pecuniary relief. Mr. M. lselthNlcs, Mr. BRIGHT, and several other hn members presented p etitions in favour of the bill hen. . legalising marriag e with a deceased wife's siste r. Mr. MOFFATT presented a petition from Bradford in favour of the budget. Mr. O'FLAHERTY presented a petition from an Irish county against the proposed extension of the in come tax to Ireland. Mr. C. BRUCE presented two petitions from places in Scotland against the repeal of University Tests. Mr. CAYLEY presented a petition from Sunderland, praying for the repeal of the malt tax. Mr. ALEXANDER presented a petition from Car low against the proposed extension of the income tax to Ireland. TOTNES ELECTION. Mr. LASCELLES brought up the report of the select committee appointed to try and determine the merits of the Totnes election petition, declaring that Mr. T. Mills had been duly elected. CUSTOMS DUTIES. Mr. HUME moved for lists of all articles on which customs duties were payable in the year 1851, on im portation into the United Kingdom, showing in columns the name of the article ; the quantity imported, ex ported, and retained for home consumption in ISSI ; the net amount of duty received •, the present rate of duty; and the proposed rates of duty ; and, of all articles imported duty free in 1851 ; and of such articles, then subject to duty, as it is proposed shall be adinitted duty free under the new tariff. Agreed to. ISLE OF MAN. Mr. EWART wished to ask the Seerntary to the Treasury whether the measures proposed to be adopted in reference to the fiscal changes in the Isls of Man are yet prepared ; and, if so, when the Government pro poses to lay the same before the house ? Also, whether it is intended that such measures shall affect importations made under the licences ending the 30th. day of June next ? Also, whether any and what measures have been adopted to promote a more frequent communication by mail with that island during the winter months ? Mr. WILSON said the proposed changes with regard to the import duties of the Isle of Man were in a state of forwardness, but he was not prepared to state exactly when they would be brought on. The import duties, however, would be extremely small, while the system of licences would be abolished. PRISON DISCIPLINE. Sir H. HALFORD wished to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to a petition from the Justices of Peace for the county of Leicester, in Quarter Sessions assembled (presented 20th April), whether it is in contemplation by her Majesty's Government to introduce any measure for adaptation of the law regarding prisons to the system of the individual separation of prisoners, as applied to those under sentence of hard labour, and generally in order to carry out the recommendation of the select com mittee of this house on prison discipline in 1850 ? Lord PALMERSTON said he presumed this ques. tion applied to a communication which was made to his predecessor by the magistrates of Leicester. The magistrate of the Leicester Prison established a rule in the prison, that persons sentenced to hard labour should be employed eight hours a day turn ing a crank, and if they objected or refused to do so they should be deprived of a certain portion of their daily meals. That regulation his predecessor, how ever, decided was contrary to law ; and if the hon. baro net who put the question wished to know whether it was the intention of the Government to bring in an act to legalise such a regulation, his answer must be that it was not. THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY Ev11,41114'61-, MAY 8 1 1858. BOLTON ELECTION. Lord R. GROSVENOR brought up the report of the Bolton election committee, declaring Mr. T. Barnes and Mr. J. Brooke to have been duly elected. The com mittee also reported that the petition was frivolous and vexatious. PIRACY IN BORNEO. Mr. T. BARING wished to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any, or what, measures have been adopted by her Majesty's Government to protect British commerce against piratical proceedings on the coast of Borneo ? - Sir J. GRAHAM said representations had been made to the Government on this subject ; and in consequence of these representations, orders had been sent out to the admiral commanding on the West India station, request. ing him to exercise his discretion in taking precautionary measures against any anticipated acts of piracy. At the same time, orders had been given to the admiral that there must be some evidence of piratical intentions be force was resorted to, and further the admiral was informed that it was not the policy of the Government to coerce or make any accession of territory on the main land of Borneo. SAVINGS BANKS. Mr. WHALLEY wished to ask the Secretary of the Treasury whether it is intended to afford further protec tion for savings banks deposits, and generally to provide for the more economical administration by the Govern ment of these institutions. Mr. WILSON said his right hon. friend the Chan cellor of the Exchequer had already given notice of hi. intention to bring in a bill for improving the manage" ment of savings banks, and that intention he still ad hered to. His right hon. friend was only deterred from putting it in force now by the position of the budget. HACKNEY CARRIAGES BILL. Sir R. IL INGLIS wished to ask his hon. friend the Under Secretary for the Home Department, a question with reference to the Hackney Carriage Bill. The par ties who were pecuniarily interested in the bill, were anxious to have it referred to a select committee. He wished to know if his hon. friend would have any objec tion to such a proposal, if it was made at the proper time. Mr. FITZROY certainly should deprecate the idea of referring the bill to a select committee, because it would lead to great delay, and might defeat the passing, of the bill this session. It was a measure in which the public were very much interested, and he should, therefore, be sorry to see it delayed in any way. (Hear, hear.) Sir R. H. INGLIS wished, then, to know at what time the hon. gentleman would bring on the discussion of the next stage of the bill ? Mr. FITZICOY replied, io-morrow night he hoped to see the bill in committee. He would not, however, bring it on after 12 o'clock. TEA DUTIES. Mr. MOFFATT wished to know when it was pro posed to bring in the regulations for effecting the reduc tion of the tea duties, and if it was intended they should take immediate effect The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the course which the Government proposed to take, after the vote on the income tax should be disposed of: was this :—They would then take the legacy duties ; after the legacy duty it would be proposed to take the second reading of the Income Tax Bill. It would be proposed to take the second reading of the Spirit Duties Bill, and after this to go into committee on the Income Tax Bill, the Government not wishing to loose any time in carrying this latter measure through its various stages. After that bill should have been disposed of the Go vernment would at once proceed with the whole of the resolutions relating to the Customs duties, and it was in tended that these resolutions should take effect from the time they were agreed to, and reported to the house. SECONDARY PUNISHMENTS. Sir J. PAKINGTON wished to know when it was proposed to make the Government statement on the subject of secondary punishments ? Lord J. RUSSELL said that was a subject which was likely to lead to considerable debate, and he could not therefore name a day for bringing it on until after the commercial plans of the Government were disposed of. INCOME TAX. Mr. PACKE wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, having his assurance that the income tax shall cease at the end of seven years, whether be will have any objection to give an option to. compound for the future payment of the tax, by a payment in one sum, or by instalments. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was quite willing to take the matter into consideration, but, at the same time, looking at the long period the tax would have to run, there would be considerable diffi culty in meeting such a proposal, and therefore his an swer must not be viewed in the light of a pledge. MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES. Mr. SPOONER wished to know if it was intended to take the miscellaneous estimates before the budget was disposed of. Lord J. RUSSELL replied in the negative. Sir W. CLAY would be glad to know if it was the intention of the noble lord to carry out his original pro mise of granting Thursday evening to the hon. member who wished to submit a motion to the house on the sub ject of church rates ? Lord J. RUSSELL said it was. LEGACY DUTY. In reply to Lord A. VANE, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said no distinction would be made in extending the legacy duties between property under settlement and property under trust. Property under settlement would nave no pre ference whatever. (Hear.) THE BUDGET—ADJOURNED DEBATE. The house then went into committee of ways and means, and the adjourned debate on the budget was resumed by Sir W. CLAY, who said that the financial mea sures of the Government had his entire and hearty approval. He believed that their rejec tion by the house would occasion disappointment not only in the metropolis, but throughout all the great towns in the kingdom. In his opinion they were wise and prudent, as well as bold and comprehensive, and in addition to giving an important and im mediate relief in regard to taxation, they held out the prospect of laying a safe and solid foundation for our fiscal system. The Government financial scheme was built mainly on the propositions of the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to the income and property tax, and if they were rejected, that scheme must be altogether aban doned. The hon. hart. entered into the discussion of the various arguments used against the extension of the in come tax to Ireland, contending that those arguments had wholly failed in convincing him that the extension of the tax combined with the remission of the Consoli dated Annuities was unjust to the people of that coun try. The main feature of the G'overnment plan connected with the income tax was its gradual and final extinction. He considered it was impossible to expect that the tax could at once be totally repealed. That could only be done in two ways—either by the gra- dual accumulation of the surplus revenue until it exceeded the expenditure by the amount of the in come tax, or by substituting another tax ; and while he believed the country would not assent to the first plan, he considered that no minister would be found who would venture to propose another tax as a substitute. But by the gradual diminution of the tax, and by fixing a period for its final extinction, the house had it within its power to get rid of the tax altogether. He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer was quite right in the course which he had taken, both in a social and economical point of view. On the whole, he thought that the budget was entitled to the approbation of the country, and he should give it his cordial support. S house anoxdot e i o F o.n intolerablelKtr he E lea L ngLdrbo,Yun burdens without : nth ! ooaoustnet they hea t yen h e af ol already n r e e s e o d l u parttio resolutions of before a scheme in f ter a e x s a t t ; ion b , ec w a h u i s c e h t w he a y s p so re u g g n h a t nt to wi e t yx h tep n np e dr w e , enlarged, thesse d income unprecedentedjustificationbadecaand o n ee t hey o or e any rgi ob political or o th er necessity ; period to perpetuate, or cont i nue for the of 7 years the income tax, with all those intolerable ine qualities which had brought diseodfittohnetpheeoLpleerihsaladture and under which so many classes. suf fered. Sir FITZROY KELLY opposed the resolutions, be cause they formed part, of a scheme o f t axat i on pregnant with au enlarged and intolerable burden upon the already oppressed landed interest ; because th e i ncome tax was, without justification or political necessity, e x t en d e d to Ireland in time of peace, and with a financial surplus in hand ; because, without any ground, it was proposed to continue the income tax unmitigated an& Anchanged • and because—and thi s was his main objection—the resolutions sought to perpetuate the injustice and inequidity which had brought discredit on the Legislature, and under which, so many persons suffered severely. In the course of 'a pro longed speech in support of these views, he expressed his hope that so•lne one connected with Ireland would move for a committee to report on the ability of that country to bear addiiional burdens, and entered into a comparison of the last and present budget as regarded the taxation of the fundholder. Introducing animadversion on the way in which, b e said ministers had recently evaded a guarantee they could not violate, he deduced an argument that there v'i'i no ground for confidence that any words which could be, introduced into the bill would bind-a ministry to ter minate the tax in 1860. ' Mr. LOWE, remarking that Sir F. Kelly's speech had not been addressed to the amendment, proceeded to deal with his arguments, amusing the committee by showing to what they led, and describing the deduction of Sir F. Kelly really to be that every person in every schedule of the income tax was entitled to a large reduction. Ho admitted that any tax was unjust per se; and in answer to the demand for graduation, contended that what Mill had laid down as the abstract justice of taxation, namely, th e requiring equal sacrifices from all parties, was impossible. He confessed that some of the flagrant errors might be corrected, and schedule D might, for instance, be dealt with ; but we should thereby introduce a new element into the system, and no longer ask what income a man had, but how he obtained it, and we should immediately have a revolution and social war in each of the schedules. He, for example, had a small property in Australia, which he would not ex change for one of the same value in London, and it would become a matter of complaint that his income was acci dentally derived under more favourable circumstances than an English one. Such a principle would ler d to the subdivision of classes until all the alphabet would be pressed into the schedules, and the tax be frittered away. As regarded I re l an d , he said that the fact shortly was, that the service for the year was inexorable, and if Ireland did not pay the 46 0,0001. some one must, and that must bo Great Britain. What claim had Ireland to make Great Britain her tributary ? The Government scheme was founded on the principle of free trade, which was more valuable even than free trade itself—namely, social and financial equality, and the doctrine that no portion of the people ought to be taxed for the benefit of another. As regarded the Consolidated Annuities, some parts of Ireland were charged with them, others not. The former surely received ample advantage ; and as for the latter, instead of their complaining of the hardship that an undistressed part of the country, which had been advancing in pros perity, was taxed lik e th e rest, as they ought to have been long F.go, they ought to be thankful that they were not charged with arrears. He sarcastically remarked upon the hardship of taking a burden off a poor cottier to put it upon a man with at least 100/. a year. Denying that this was a "rate-in-aid," and declaring that it was an Imperial tax for Imperial purposes, he demanded whether the word Union was a meaningless formula ; and urged that we were not entering into a convention with a foreign country. He observed that it would have been easy for Mr. Glad stone to have got rid of three-fourths of the speeches in this debate, if he had chosen to deal with the income tax as the late Government had proposed to do, and had stooped to mean truckling to gain a temPorary popularity. Mr. ISAAC BUTT contended that the tax was unjust as an Imperial one, and especially unjust as regarded Ire land, and that no reasonable prospect was held out of its terminrAtion at the end of seven years. He urged that by the budget carriages and attorneyswere relieved from taxa tion., that the struggling class of artisan and trader might be burdened. As to Ireland, he thought it would be well worth while to relieve her representatives from such taunts as Mr. Cobden's, but then her whole financial condition must be examined, and it must be shown that she was to be fairly dealt with. He denied the unwillingness of the Irish to pay their debts, and hoped he had shown that Irish gentlemen might oppose the budget for other reasons than those which had been imputed to them, lavishly, if not liberally. Referring once more to Mr. Cobden's allu siontomthainh; efigahmtT head e challengedby shn him mbe to makersforthe ‘ g `j o o o b a jobbery of Kilhis words. Mr. Sergeant MURPHY contended that it was clear from the disposition of the English Parliament, that an income tax for Ireland was inevitable ; and, therefore, that it was better to take it at the hands of those who would also give good government than from those in whom he had less con fidence. There was a reasonable guarantee for its extinc tion in 1860. The remission of the consolidated annuities was a very important boon, and he would only look at the question as one affecting the whole of Ireland. He also remarked upon the advantage Ireland had derived from free trade, while paying no tax. Mr. CONOLLY argued that the imposition of this tax upon Ireland was unjust, and denied the right of Govern ment to treat the consolidated annuities as a just debt. Mr. ROCHE did not think the income tax the most un just tax existing, and pointed out the equal injustice of the incidence of many indirect taxes; and he believed that in 1860 the balance on the Chancellor of the Exchequer's plan would be in favour of Ireland. Insisting on the value of obtaining equality, even at a sacrifice, he expressed his opinion that the budget was beneficial to the best interests of Ireland. Mr. DISRAELI—There are several hon. members con nected with Ireland who wish to address the committee; who will no doubt answer the observations of the hon. gentleman who has just sat down, but, as this debate has not passed over a whole week—(hear, hear)--I think it may not perhaps be presumptuous if I take some part in it to express the opinions of some English members upon the question before us. (Cheers.) Whether we divide to-night or not, and I hope we may divide to-night— (hear, and cheers)— hon. gentlemen on the other side will clearly understand that, in all probability, many occasion s will occur on which they may offer their opinions upon the interesting subject under discussion, for at present we are only upon the threshold of the debate. (Hear, hear.) Under these circumstance, then, I shall take the liberty of offering some observations] to the com mittee. I am bound to say that, in considering the budget of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with all that attention which so important a proposition de serves, to the general principles upon which his financial policy is framed, I must give my entire apProbation. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) I say that in no sphit of affected candour, or to obtain credit for a magnanimity which is really not required by the occasion, but I say it because I find in the principles upon which he has framed his policy the identical principles which, only four months ago, I endeavoured on two occasions, on the other side of the table, to impress upon the consideration of this house. (Cheers.) I said then, as the organ of the Government, that I thought the time had arrived when it was necessary to assimilate our financial policy to our new commercial sys tem. (Some hon. member—we believe Lord J. Russell— exclaimed, " Hear, hear." I don't know who said " Hear, hear." I think it 'was the noble lord opposite, but I recollect when I made that statement four months ago the noble lord, instead of saying "Hear, hear," rose and, in a spirit certainly of incredulity, if not of ridi cule, spoke of the idea of assimilating our financial policy to our new commercial system as a wild con ception, which had nothing to do with the practical affairs of life. (" Hear, hear," and a laugh.) I said then, Sir, in order to assimilate our financial policy to our new commercial system, we must make up our minds to com mence and to carry out a complete revision of our taxation. Will the noble lord say " Hear, hear," to that ? I remem ber that when I made that observation before—and recol lect it is only four short months ago—the noble lord said it was most ridiculous to enforce a complete revision of our taxation ; that our taxation had been revised more than once ; that anything like a formal revision of taxa tion was quite unnecessary, and out of the question ; that all wa could do was to let the principles which had been established with respect to our finance operate in a natu ral manner, and that any proposal to have a formal or complete revision of taxation was one of those phrases which could never influence the affairs of the world. I am, however, extremely glad to find that the noble lord is so ready to encourage me at the commencement of my obser vations. (A laugh.) But it was not merely the noble lord who entertained this opinion. We had a speech de livered to-night—a very able speech, delivered, unfortu nately, in a thinner house than it deserved —by a member of the Administration, the secretary of a board, and, I be lieve, the secretary of a board because he made a speech against the last budget. (Hear, and laughter.) What did that hon. gentleman say on the same subject? The hon. gentleman the Secretary of the Board of Control (Mr. Lowe), in the month of December last, saw no case made out for any revision of taxation. "All that they had to do," he said, " was to continue going on as they had gone on hitherto." (Cheers from the Ministerial side.) We shall have several more of these assenting cheers—(laugh ter)—and I can assure hon. gentlemen they are very agree able to me to listen to. (Hear, and a laugh.) The hon. Secretary to the B oar d of Control continued : " When the surplus shall be disposed of by their making further remissions of taxation, on the same principle as former remissions had been mad e , w hi c h l e d to the wonderful exten sion of trade, co mmerce, an d i ncrea sing revenue, which all acknowledged, they would then have done all that a wise Go vernmentad a prudent Legislature could do under the cir cumstances." I H h the ar. hon.) Now, meinb l e e r t hon. for gentlemen Kidderminster, for I m these ay ewtrroo recur words rahs order to them. That hon. gentleman has spoken to-night, l i i n ste t n h i e ng t a o bs m en e ee, now un , a fo n rt d u i n n ate s l v y e , ry o d f iffi m i a nw n t y hiseph w ir l li i t o fro ar in e that which he manifested on the occasion to which I have just referred. It must be remembered that I said that, while it was absolutely necessary to assimilate our financial policy to our new commercial system, and that that object could only be effected by a complete revision of our taxa tion, I said also that there were two thin Chan cellor of the Exchequer should not, under the circumstances r th ef i r s a gr in e f a r t o o m b j c e lo e i t n e g o , nl a d nd no wi t b t e ho a u tt t o h in a e vi d n . g recourse to things ? One of them was, that the Chancellor of the Ex wchasequteor b m e us s t nia n p o li t e s d hri b n y k t f h r e om pro m po sk ss in i g of a ne d w efi t c a i x en es cy in to carry out his system • an d the other was, that it was absolutely ne cessa ry that he should not bound his opera tions by the horizon of the financial year, but that he might even presume to attemp t to regulate financi a l operations for a longer term. Now, how wsueprpolythtehse propositions e received by the no ble lord and his collea gues ? Why, h y language can express the reprobation— (cheers i from: s the Opposition)—with wh ich the heretical idea was received, that a Chancellor of the Exche q uer ma y feel vacuum by duty the t create sZodefieiency and to new tax. (Cheers and laughter.) That indignation was not confined to the Secretary of the Board of Control, who was then for standing upon the ancient ways. (A laugh.) What said that high authority the right hon. member for the Univer sity of Cambridge ? (Hear, hear.) That right hon. gentle man (Mr. Goulburn) was particularly alarmed upon the subject, and described to the house the very unorthodox manner in which it wa s then proposed that the finances of this country should be administered. He said— " But mark how different was the bis on which this and former Governments proceeded. They proceeded on the basis of having first secured by a skilful management of the receipts and expenditure of the country a largo available balance, out of which they could afford to make reductions. They did not in the first place create a deficiency, and then call upon Parliament to make it up by fresh taxation." (Cheers.) Well, what were the feelings of the present Chancellor of the Exchequer upon the subject? I don't know whether the right hon. gentleman , is present, but I shall bo sorry to make any comments upon what he has said in his absence. The Chancellor of the Exchequer seemed to be struck with some horror at the proposition— (a laugh) — a nd he said, speaking of me almost iu a tone of derision,—" He is going to imp ose ono tax in order to re peal another tax. (Hear, and laughter.) Now, that is a, most uncommo:Ei proceeding on th e p ar t o f a Ch ancellor of the Exchequer. ' But, great as was the Indignation of rho members of the present Government, because I had recourse to the first method which was necessary to carry out my policy--- : namely that I should ~r eatL4 dpfisii6ncy— - 4 Atipply it by hew taxation, their indignation vas still grO'Ettut that I should presume to antieirmte the manage ment of our finances for a pe r i o d more advanced than the termination of the impending financial y ear . (H ear, hear.) I may quote upon this subject agai n th e words of the hon. member for Kidderminster, because, as ho has shown to night ho is not only an lietletitable inhinber but a very high-minded Member. (Laughter.) He has told us to night, that he is one of those gentlemen who never will sacrifice anything for ephemeral popularity—(Hear, and a laugh)— that ho is a man who would not to-clay say one thing and to-morrow say another to gain temporary ends. (Hear, hear,) Listen, then, to the words of the hon. mem ber for Kidderminster, and I quote hiss speech, for it was a single speech, and one that received a memorable reward. (Cheers and laughter.) Mark, that in order to carry into effect a complete revision of our financial system, it w as necessary to have recourse to two proceedings—the first was to create a deficiency by the remission of taxes, which could only be supplied by the proposition of others ; and the second was that a Chancellor of the Exchequer engaged in such an enterprise must not shrink from attempting to control the financial management of more than the financial year. That, however, was not the opinion of the Secre tary of the Board of Control. He said,— " The right hon. gentleman" (my humble self) " had given them two budgets to consider; one for 1853, the other for 1854. The wisest man would have enough to do in attempt ing to arrive at a correct view of the financial condition of a great country, even for a single year." (Cheers from the Opposition). But now we have a budget for seven years—(prolonged cheering from the Opposition benches)—and, not content with this—not content with regulating the commercial arrangements of the country for seven years—the Government accompany that measure with financial propositions that fix the rate of interest for nearly half a century. (Cheers.) Really I think this is rather a remarkable contrast to have occurred within the space of four months in the opinions of a statesman who would not say one thing to-day and another to-morrow for mere ephemeral popularity, the only difference being that the economic gentleman who was the member for Kidder minster four months ago is now Secretary to the Board of Control. (Laughter.) Hon. gentlemen will doubtless ex cuse these frank comments. I make not these quotations by way of taunt. ("Oh !" from the Ministerial, and cheers from the Opposition.) I have a perfect right to make the quotations, and I am justified in making them, to vindi cate the course I took on the occasion to which they refer, (Hear, hear.) Well, then, having given my approbation to the general principles on which the Chancellor of the Exchequer's financial scheme is founded, because, I have before observed, it is, in fact, the identical process by which I my se lf a tt e mptedi to operate (" No, no ' " from the Ministerial, and "H ear, h ear, " f rom the Opposition benches)—the process is the same, though the application is different—(hear, hear)—l have now to see whether I can bestow the same approbation upon the application of the principle as I give to the principle itself. I come first to the consideration of the first resolution before the com mittee, to which an amendment has been proposed by my hon. friend the member for Hertfordshire. The Chan cellor of the Exchequer, by this resolution, proposes to continuo the income tax for a term of seven years. It is a tax which has never, in our time, been proposed for a period of that duration. (Hear, hear.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer objects to provisional budgets—he objects to our finances being in a condition which is mot esta blished and confirmed—he thinks that no arm of our finance should be of a temporary or doubtful character. There is a great authority, I am told, just published, which seems to express the same opinion. This is the lead ins, article of the Economist newspaper. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) It is headed " The Budget, its Great Poli tical Feature ;" and it informs its readers that " Nothing can be more disgraceful to a great nation, or injurious to its best interests, than to permit its fi nanc i a l Icondition to be exposed to serious uncertainty, which has pre vailed in this couttry, at least since the expiry of the in come tax in 1851. Since then more than 5,000,0001. of the necessary income of the country have been subject to an annual vote." This, then, is the great political feature of the budget, to terminate the dangerous and pernicious oystem by which so large a portion of our income as 5,000,0001. is dependent on an annual vote of this house. What new lights break upon us ! Perhaps I may remind ' the committee—although I confess that until I heard the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and road this authority, I should have thought it unnecessary to do so—that at no very remote period —no longer, indeed, than when I first entered this assembly, a large amount of the annual re venue was always under the control of Parliament, and subject to an annual vote. (Hear.) But what is more ei traordinary still, this state of things was held by high constitutional authorities to be one of the securities of the rights and liberties of the people. (Cheers.) The system was then highly valued by all gentlemen professing liberal opinions, not only as the safe g uard of popular rights and liberties, but also as th e best security for an economical administration of the finances. (Hear, hear.) The sugar duties were voted annually in order that Parliament might have a control over the annual revenue of the country. (Hoar, hear.) In amount, too, the sugar duties were little less than the income tax, which we are now dis cussing. (Cheers.) Why, it was only , at a very recent period that the Minister of the day, having to deal with the sugar duties, took the opportunity of appealing to the house, on account of the question of slavery to concede that those duties should no longer be dependent on an annual vote and entered into a compact with the house to substi tute for the amount secured by those duties an equal sum to be subject to an annual vote of the house. (Cheers.) Who was that minister? The committee shall hear. On the 20th of July, 1846, the house resolved itself into a Commit tee of Ways and Means, like the present, and Lord John Russell spoke in these words :—" I do not propose to vary in any respect the constitutional practice of leaving a large a considerable amount of revenue, dependent on a yearly vote of this house, as hitherto has been the case, I shall therefore propose some other source of revenue, which I will state before these resolutions are formed into the shape of a bill, to be yearly income, and for which, pre vious to the sth of July, the minister of the Crown shall every year be obliged to ask the consent of parliament. I think that it would be unfortunate that the duties on sugar should be made the annual subject of debate, and, without departing from a constitutional practice, I shall endeavour to find some other duty, which it will be less objectionable to take as an annual vote." (Cheers.) The noble lord, who will probably follow me in debate, will, perhaps avail himself of the opportunity to inform us what is the branch of public revenue which, in conformity with the promise then given, lie has provided for the annual decision of Par liament. (Cheers and laughter.) The noble lord, however, on a point of constitutional practice, speaks with the au thority of a master, and ho is bound, before the committee shall come to a vote on the resolution submitted to it, to explain upon what grounds be supports a proposition ad vanced for the express purpose, as was avowed, of setting aside the " constitutional practice of having a considerable amount of revenue dependent on a yearly vote of this House." (Cheers.) We have been expecting every year that the noble lord would produce the tax over which Par liament should exorcise the control declared to be so valu able in a constitutional as well as in an economic point of view ; but we certainly did not expect to be told that the enjoyment of this great constitutional privilege was a fiscal enormity—(cheers and laughter)—we did not expect to be 'told that when, by accident, an opportunity oc curred of dealing with a branch of revenue, equal in amount to, but not greater than the sugar duties, if we exercised our power in this respect wo should endanger the finances and expose the country to danger. (Cheers.) So much, then, for the Chancellor of the Exchequer's first proposition to renew the income tax for seven years on the ground that it was desirable a large branch of the national revenue shOuld not be dependent on an annual vote of Par liament. I differ from Le right hon, gentleman on that point. The late Government having to propose the con tinuance Of the income tax, indicated that the period should be . three years, in deference to the preced e nt w hi c h had always prevailed ; but, if we had to chose between a period of seven years and a period of ono year, I should vote forthe latter. (Hear.) What I wish to impress -on the cominittee is, the error of these new fangled doctrines —that it is dangerous to have a large amount of revenue dependent on the annual vote of Parliament ; for I believe that if we regained the exercise of the ancient constitu tional privilege from which we have been too long de barred, it, would be in the power of this house to ensure a better and more economical control over the finances. I come now to the second part of the Chancellor of the Ex chequer/a proposition respecting the income tax, and that is with regard to its assessment. The right hon. gentleman proposes.not only to continue the tax for seven years, but also that no difference shall be made in the mode of its assessments. Perhaps the house will not think it imperti nent in ..me if I take the opportunity of explaining the reasons why the late Government fixed on the rate of as sessmentswhich they recommended the House of Commons to adopt s Remember, I have never had an opportunity of expressing my opinions on this matter. Our vote for the income tax never came before the house. In deference to the feeling of the house, I placed the whole financial propositions of the late Government before it, and the income tax resolution was included among the others, but I said, at the time, that t not intend to ask for the opinion of the Committee of Ways and Means on the question until after Chrifitmas, and that all I then de sired was, that the house should be in possession of the principle on which wo proceeded. The noble lord the member for London, when a candidate for a scat in Parlia ment lately, said I had declared I had not had time to look over the schedules of the income tax. I suppose men may say anything when they are on the hustings. (Cheers and laughter.) Great license, wo know, is permitted under such circumstances, and therefore I should have made no remark on that statement of the noble lord, had I not heard it stated on Friday last, in sentences of solemn pro priety, that the debate on my proposition respecting the income tax had confessedly broken down. Why, there never was,any discussion on the subject. I never said that I had not looked over the schedules of the income tax ; and perhaps those who make these assertions are not as well acquainted with them as myself. (Hear, hear.) What I said was, that between the time when I publicly an nounced the rate of difference we proposed in the schedules, and the end of a week following, I had not had time to refer to the practical authorities to make an adjustment in harmony with the settlement we proposed, but that no alteration,that could be made would materially affect the financial results which I had laid before the house. Let me remind the committee of the circumstances under which we undertook the revision of the taxation of the country, the first steps towards which was the proposition I sub mitted to„ the house ; for I stated, at the time, that it was , not a conglete system. It was our opinion that the taxa tion of, is country unduly pressed on the interests con nected of_ the land. (Hear, hear.) That opinion we expressed' openly ; we had no wish to conceal it. It was our opinion that after the abrogation of a protective policy, the best Diode of assisting a class subjected to unrestricted competition was to lessen the cost of production, and we thought that that could not be done without is general 1 revision of the system of taxation. (hear.) This policywas openly announced ; nothing was hidde n ; our object was avowed, and the mean by which we intended to attain that object were publicly. : announced. (Hear, hear.) If we could convince the country that our policy was as justl we did not despair of attaining our object ; but fo r n ls e s d in Could convince the country that ourpolicy ns nor did we justice, we know that it would not be accepted, I desire that it should be. The principle of unrestricted com- I petition having been recognized , i t became my duty the avowed 'commence the revision of our financial system with view of removing its undue pressure on land. It was impossible for us to carry those measures into effect; it was impossible for us to sustain the operations which we contemplated without the aid of the income tax—that tax 1 against wbich so much odium had been excited, and in our opinion, in a great degree, so unjustly excited. It was our opinion, having to revise the whole system of our taxation, with the avowed purpose of relieving the land from an undue pressure, that it was absolutely necessary we should conic to the commercial classes with some exposition of 1 what we really believed was the undue pressure of one par -1 ticular thx upon them, and of our willingness to remove the injustice of that tax with respect to the trading, tho coin mercial, and manufacturing classes. I make no contrasts hew- - cnir time is too precious—between income derived from realized property and incomes the result of intelli gence and skill. We have no time for rhetoric now; but there is not a man in this house who has not contemplated the question, end rho is not ashamed by the contrast, whatever his opinion nie,l be on the ,general financial ques tion,—and I appeal alike to the brain and to the heart of every man to come to a verdict of that kind. But I will meet the question of the trading and the commercial classes—those classes connected with terminable annuities. I shall put before the committee in a brief and succinct formula a contrast that brought conviction to my mind, and it is necessary to my argument, end in vindication of the course I am now detailing, that I should place before you briefly and clearly the considerations which led to our determination. There is a man with 20,0001. which he in vests in realised property. Well, I will suppose that he obtains 8001. a year for it, being at the rate of 4 per cent. There is another man who hag the same amount of capital, who invests it in property perishable at the end of 20 years-- T in silks, in machinery, or in annuities terminable at that time, The one man who receives for his 20,0001. _6O of e 72 _ s3oali: years, b a e m i n o g u e n tr t h ieint interest, s t et t e e rr d e Ins In t l a : b e t e i 4 s hpaebrl Annuity, e p e r n o t p : e ,e r t x ta y he t v i ested in real pr o p er ty 80 0 1 . yearly ; the other receives for a a tlt t y t a ll t e f e thi I d e. end of t wen t y years will supply the capital which has perished. (H ear, hear.) Take that case—it takes in all. But how d o y ou t ax the two men ? You tax the man who owns the realised property at the rate of 241. a year, and you tax the 1,4731., which is virtually also realised pro perty, at the r a t e o f 44 1. a year. And this is the system pwilli.ofcehssytooubaertal3elegcutriasrurPrprrtes—(entcaliteievrses) -- f s- theis i c commercial you, w ho presently show you, mos body, are now going to establish for a term of seven years, as you say, but, as I shall pro bably for ever. (Hear, hear.) You aro taxin g the pro perty of those classes whom you are sent h ere to represent nearly double the amount, and you do this while at the same time you continuo to tell us that you are doing so in the interest of the trading and commercial classes. (Cheers.) With these facts before us, with a conviction that the as sessment was unjust, we feel that it was absolutely neces sary in order to put the case to the commercial classes when asking them to agree to the continuance of the income tax that we might carry out a revision of our financial system, with the avowed purpose of relieving the land from an un due pressure —it was necessary, I say, that we should ac knowledge the existence of inequalities in the system of assessment of the income tax. We never proposed the difference of 4 and of per cent. as a financial arrange ment. Wo offered it only as the acknowledgment of a principle. (Hear, hear.) the right honourable gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer says that land is not taxed more than any other property under the schedule, in which land and all real property is included ; and the right hon. gentleman further says, that when you take into consideration the burdens on land you ought to in clude all the local taxation. Strong phrases these from the Chancellor of the Exchequer ! (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Significant acknowledgments from that side of the house, when I remember the five years during which I endeavoured to press upon the house an acknowledgment that there were burdens peculiar to land. (Hear, hear.) When I remember;,that I was told, night after night, and by no one more earnestly, more continuously, or more consistently than by the members of the present Govern ment, that the idea of local taxation was a burden upon land was a more illusion, I say it is satisfactory to me to have lived to find on acknowledgment of its being true in the basis, to a certain degree, of the financial arrangement before the committee. (Cheers.) The right hon. gentle man the Chancellor of the Exchequer says there is a dif ference of 2d. in the pound in the schedules between the assessment of real property and the assessment of other kinds of property. Well, sir, I will not stop to analyse the data upon which the right hon. gentleman has ar rived at his conclusion, but he may be sure that he will be reminded of this conclusion before these debates are over. (Hear, hear.) But, sir, I say that it was not as a complete financial arrangement, but as the ac knowledgment of a principle made in the spirit of con ciliation, that I made that difference in the schedules. We have now the income tax at a particular rate of assess ment, but no certainty that that assessment shall not be changed. We have a Government that professes to deal more largely with the income tax than any other Govern ment in our experience, and deals with it for a period of seven years. This is an age of great financial operations. Suppose next year a Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes to modify the rate of assessment—suppose that happens, which happened half a century ago, when we are also governed by " All the talents"—(laughter)—supposing the Ministry come down to the house, and propo se to ex t en d the income tax to 10 per c en t., what answer would it be to the artist, the artisan, the merchant, and the tradesman, that the land was 2s. or 21d. in the pound more than.they were? If our arrangement had been established, they would at least have felt that if at a future time the impost assumed a severer and more burdensome character gene rally, they, at least, must find considerable relief in the change in the assessment. And, sir, I still maintain that in coming forward to ask the commercial classes to grant us the income tax, in order that we might carry into effect a complete revision of our taxation, the object of which was to relieve land from an undue pressure of taxation, according to our opinions, we were taking a prudent, a wise, and a comprehensive course, which, carried out to its full extent, was one which would not have been fruitless. We were told by those who had a right to speak with au thority on such subjects that the plan we proposed would not diminish the revenue, while it would most certainty give satisfaction to the commercial classes. We believed in the inequality of the assessment as respected the com mercial, trading, and professional classes, and we deemed it our duty to endeavour to adjust the inequality, because we were not asking them to grant the income tax for the avowed purpose of relieving the undue pressure of taxation on the land of the united kingdom. (Loud cheers.) Well, sir, the right hon. gentleman opposit s, now proposes to continue the tax, without any difference in the assessment, for a further period of seven years. I may, perhaps, be allowed briefly to state the reasons why I do not think that at the end of seven years the incidence of the tax will terminate. The first reason why I am incredulous is, be cause I see that the spirit of the times in which we live is hostile to the abrogation of that tax. (Hear, hear.) I beg the house to recollect the various aspects which the income tax has assumed since it was first brought under our notice by the late Sir Robert Peel. It was first brought forward to supply a deficiency, and in order that it might assist in the creation of a surplus out of which the indi rect taxation of the country might be dealt with. It was continued again for the same purpose of creating a surplus, which should allow you still further to deal with the indirect taxes. Well, what is the case at the present moment ? It is no longer proposed, in order to create a surplus, to enable you to deal with the system of direct taxation ; but you are so far advanced that you must grant the income tax to support your revenue as at present established ; and to provide for your necessary expendi ture ; and you ask us not only to grant the income tax, but to lay on other taxes to the amount of nearly 3,000,000/., for the purpose of dealing with the indirect taxation—(loud cheers)—and, considerin g the circum stances which have o c cu rre d d ur i ng th e last 10 years, a man must shut his eyes to all that passes around him, and be incapable of perceiving the temper and the signs of the times, the thoughts and habits of his fellow-men, if he can suppose that the income tax, having so well fulfilled the purposes for which it was established, will be abandoned— he must be the most credulous of men if ho can believe that we aro standing still or retrograding. How can any man suppose that the arguments which prevail with re spect to taxation will n o t be generally applied ? What ar gument in favour of remitting the tea duty does not apply to the wino duty ? What argument is there that is brought forward in favour of a remission of the Excise duty on soap that does not equally apply to the Excise duty on paper? (Hear.) Cheap sugar is one of the bless ings of the age. Why should you not have cheaper sugar? (Cheers.) We have had the article of tobacco brought under our notice lately, and we have been re minded that English smugglers have always made large fortunes so long as we retained the immense impost on tobacco. (Hear.) Well, I have also a second reason why I think the income tax will not terminate at the end of 7 years, and that second reason I find in the whole scope of the financial policy of the right hon. gentleman—in all his antecedents—in the whole of his conduct and career. If the arguments of the right hon. gentleman upon this and upon former occasions mean anything, they mean that we should find the means of supplying the whole of the re venue raised from the Customs' duties in direct taxes. That is the natural and inevitable consequence of the right hon. gentleman's arguments. I am perfectly willing to concee, that when the sight hon. gentleman (Mr. Glad stone) held out the prospect, which he did the other night, that at the end of 7 years the income tax would cease to exist, he was speaking with perfect conscientiousness. I have not the slightest doubt that the sight hon. gentle man is sanguine in his hopes and anxious to effect a suc cessful arrangement, and I am ready to admit that, should the year 1860 find him in the position of Chancellor of the Exchequer but bring with it circumstances totally adverse to his commercial policy, the right hon. gentleman is so conscientious a man that it is quite likely he would resign the office sooner than propose the continuance of the tax for a further period. (Hear.) We shall see him, as we did in the case of the Maynooth—(hoar)---resign his office and retire beneath the gangway, whence the right hon. gentleman would again rise and recommend the re newel of the tax ; he would sacrifice himself to save his country. (Cheers and laughter.) I have given at least two reasons, ono being the character and feeling of the age, and the other the character of the right hon. gentleman, by which I am induced to believe that the income tax will become a permanent tax if we consent to its retention for a period of 7 years. If that be so, it appears to me that wo have arrived at this dilemma :—if this is to be a per manent tax, we are authorised, with the inequalities, the injustice, and the odious qualities that it possesses— are we authorised to extend it to new classes and coun tries without any attempt being made to mitigate these odious qualities and to adjust those inequalities? If it be, as I believe it avowedly is, the basis of the Government proposition that this is to bo only a tem porary tax, for seven years, is it wise — is it politic, I ask again, to introduce an impost so essentially unjust and ,hear.) odious to new classes and new countries . 9 But that is the dilemma of the right hon. gentleman. .at it,• opinion is, that our proper policy wo uld be to renew and for a very limited time, as was proposed by the late Government, with as much of a mitigatory character as of the late we could contrive. That was the proposition hon. friend Government, and it is the proposition of my L ton), although the member for Hertfordshire (Sir B. yt_ hon. friend does not the adoption of that proposition of my bind any gentleman who may support it to the specific proposal of the late Govornmeitt But if this tax is not to and its injustice are to be mitigated, and if its inequalities baffle both Minister and Legislature, the best thing to do s and accruing income as you re ceiveis to apply your surplus which M . • it to the reduction of an impost no mister can manage and no people can long endure. (Cheers.) I n the whole of this question , in considerin g this important ar m of our na tional finance, which the right l ion. gentle man the Chancellor of the Exchequer described with so much power, but which I think ho described in a manner that conveyed an erroneous impression to hon. memb w ho are not experienced in financial matter • ers s —in consider ing this tax, we should always endeavour, as accurately as we can, to ascertain whether the objects w its perpetuation are worth the cost. (Hoar, eare to gain by tax upon soap is a bad tax, the tax hear.) The and, as we obtain a surplus, these taut)" paper is bad ; early command the attention of the Minister I admit, should But, when you are asked to makeet of Finance. manent portion of our finance, you the income tax a per the taxes upon soap and tea are in are asked, not whether they are—but whether it is worth or not—of course yourself from th e i nc id ence of ti', your while t o re li eve the incothe tax. You. must follow se taxes by p erpe t uat i ng Frank lin, and see wheth er the whistle is the advi ce o f Dr. description of th e i ncome is worth it s p r i ce. Th e right hon. gentlem an gave us a. tax and its great ac hi evement West Biding (Mr. Coixien) s• The hon. memb er f or th e it was somewhat declamatory but that not quarrel His I do . But it appeared to sue to b an idea of th e resu l ts of the be inaccurate, or rath er t o conve y income tax, to which I may be pardoned if I advert. This is a new house, and I am happy to say there are many young members in it, some of ____.. I whom weal born since some of the great events occurre_ dof which we are treating. To Clem the ri g ht h on. gentleman may have conveyed an imp -, -, ssion th a t w ith the income equal slight surplus surolus of e x p en dit ure—the 1 the e x p enses of the war, in tax, in addition to the ordira.zy sources o f revenue, we andy produced et revenue being 65,000,000 1 ., and tin a expenditure 67,000,000/. —or the reverse, I forget whicii way the b a l ance was. w a ith res o 'e u n ly ile a Now, if that were so, unqu,sstionably the income tax would be that colossal weapon It iiich he so justly described it. But between 1806 and 1816,. the year of the peace, the right hon. gentleman forgot to soy that although we had a revenue of 65,000,0001., meeting an expenditure of 67,000,0001., yet that there was simultaneously created a vast addition to the public debt, and that between 1806 and 1816 that public debt had incresed from 600,000,0001. to about 840,000,0001. (Hear, hear.) Hon. gentlemen insist remember this, when they h ear of the efficacy of this colossal instrument, that there was a deficit in 1814, 1815, an d .1816, of 91,000,000/. That was the state of our finances. We had an increase of our deficit simultaneously with the use of this charmed weaposi, whose qualities the Chancellor of the Exchequer so ably dilated on. There is one other point the in income tax to which I must advert, and that is its extension. Assuming, as I do, the perma nent feature of this tax, I think that no class or country should have been exposed to it without a mitigation of its injustice. But I must argue as if this tax will cease. And now I have to consider its extension to Ireland. The right hon. gentleman the Pre sident of the Board of Control (Sir C. Wood) said that I had proposed the extension of the income tax to Ireland, and that I did not propose a measure to deal with the con solidated annuities. I must say, sir, that I see no connexion between the income tax and the consolidated annuities. (Cheers.) I see no connexion between the incidence of imperial taxation and the results of local ar rangement, and I think it most impolitic, indiscreet, and unwise ever to mix them together. (Hear.) Sir, I have heard, not in the course of this debate, but of conversa tions within this house, of something like a compact rela tive to the income tax and the Irish members. (Cheers.) Now, of all the men in this house, I am one who, perhaps, needed less than any other to have a compact with any Irish member as to the policy which I felt it my duty to recommend with regard to the income tax and the conso lidated annuities. Four months ago I had to consider in the responsible situation in which I was then placed, the extension of the income tax to Ireland, and, after a ma tureo consideration o f th e su bj ec t, we unan i mously came t the conclusion that it would be unwise and inexpedient to extend it to Ireland. We not only thought it unwise to extend it to Ireland at the present moment, but for the considerable period which we proposed to Parliament to intrust us with this tax we had no immediate intention of changing our policy in this respect. It was our opinion, for reasons which I need not give , but it w as arr i ve d a t after ample and anxious consideration by the late Govern ment, that it was quite out of the question to extend the income tax to Ireland. Sir, I fall prepared to support the same policy now that I advocated on the other side of the table. (Hear.) It is not true that I was not prepared to make a proposition upon the Consolidated Annuities. I say that these two subjects ought not to be mixed up with each other, and that they have no necessary connexion. On the contrary, I said that I would take the earliest day to submit a resolution to the house ou the • Golisolidated Annuities. I said that, after I st tted that the Got ernment did not intend to extend the income tax to Ireland. The proposal I was prepared to bring forward with regard to the Consolidated Annuities was certainly not that which the right hon. gentleman has made, but it was one founded upon equity, which would, I think, have 4:wen complete satisfaction to all those who were interested in the affair. I have now touched upon the principal points of the first resolution of the right hon. gentleman. I might stop here, but I beg the permission of the committee—and I will not abuse their indulgence—to allow me to expresiolimart oral opinion which I entertain with respect to the -financial policy recommended by the 'Chancellor of the Exchequer.. Sir, I have one great objection to that policy. Itiitiyho,p to me that the whole of the financial policy . of tVO rights. hon. gentleman is conceived in a spirit of injustice skid land. (Loud cheers.) N ow , s i r , that is a subject on I have no wish to indulge in declamation, as the hon. ' member for the West Riding said of the Chancellor of the Ezell* pier. lam ready, with the permission of the com mittee, to establish the truth of my opinion by reasoning and by facts. And, as I plead for an interest which is now surrounded for no artificial legislation—as I give yon credit for sincerely wishing that all classes of the commu nity should, so far as it is possible, receive from the Legis turo, especially upon fi nanc i a :subjects, justice,—l trust you will listen to me with temper and toleration, and that you will not permit the memory of ancient feuds to divert your minds from the facts which I shall lay before you. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, I would ask the committee to view for a moment the state of our revenue in its amount. If you look to the last returns you will find that the ordi nary sources of our revenue, deducting that income tax which was only proposed as a temporary tax, and which as a temporary tax is the basis of the financial scheme of the Ministry—deducting that temporary tax from the ordinary sources of revenue, the revenue amounts to about 46,000,0001. starling per annum. This great country, with the most extensive commerce of modern times,—the most admirable manufactures, governed by the great towns,-- this country of progress raises an imperial r evenue t o the amount of 46,000,0001. sterling per annum from its ordi nary sources. Now, let the house observe that one-fourth of that revenue is raised by a duty upon a single crop of the British farmer. (Cheers.) The average of the united duties that you levy, directly or indirectly, upon barley is upwards of 230 per cent. (Hear, hear.) Now, let mo show you how this system operates—how it must operate under the financial policy recommended by her Majesty's Government. (Hear, hear.) You are called upon in thiS scheme to deal with the tea duties. It is unneces sary for me to say that that is a proposition which I can view with no repugnance ; I have always considered that the tea duties, per se, were a most unwise impost, and one which a Minister of Finance, at a favourable oppor tunity, and in a proper spirit, ought to deal with ; and I proved the sincerity of my views by dealing with, them. (Hear, hear.) I make no comment to-night upon the pro position of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with respect to the tea duties : I believe that the supply is illimitable which China can afford us of tea, and therefore, though I should have preferred my more prudent arrangement, I am not terrified by the arrangement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. But if I were of the same opinion as the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or the member for the Uni versity of Cambridge, that the supply was limited, then I confess, if I wore Chancellor of the Exchequer, I should not feel as easy as ho seems to be. (Laughter, and cries of " Hear, bear.") But underslaad what you are going to do. You aro going to reduce the duties upon tea more than 100 per cent. ; you aro going to bring tea into in creased competition with those beverages that are prepared from the productions of the British farmer. (Hear, hear.) It will probably become a substitute for spirits and beer produced from barley. (Hear.) Many gentlemen opposite say that they have no objection to tea or to wine becoming a substitute for spirits—for whisky, for gin, or for beer. Well, if that is the natural course of human affairs—if that change resulted from a concomitant change of habits and feelings and tastes in the people, he would be a very unwise man who should set his face against the change. But, if that change is produced by the foreign products entering into competition with the English products, with the immense advantage of being taxed by half less, then their substitution for the products of the British farmer is in fact not the consequence of a change of taste in the pa ,- ple, but of your fiscal injustice. (Hear, hear.) And that is what I wish to impress upon you. Rely upon it, you may crack jokes about reducing the malt duties, and re missions of duty going into the pocket of the brewer, and maudlin philanthropists may denounce dram-drinking, and say that they will not encourage a legislation th a t ga s es any impetus to such a h a bit ; but the jests and jokes even of a President of the Board of Control will be baffled by the inexorable principles of political economy—(hear)— and the maudlin philanthropist who denounces dram drinking, but is nothing loth to receive the dividends which dram-drinking supplies, is not a legislator who I hops will ever influence the decrees of the House of Com mons. (Hear, hear.) 11.000,0001. or 12,000,0001. a-year can never be raised without being paid by the consumer, and, if paid by the consumer, they must restrict the in dustry and restrain the trade and commerce of the man that produces. (Hear, hear.) It is of very great impor tance, no doubt, that we should deal with the excessive indirect taxation that attaches to many foreign articles ; it is of great importance that we should extend our com merce with India and China on a sounder basis ; and that is one of the main reasons why we should deal with the tea duties. It is of very great importance that we should increase our commerce with France and the south of Europe ; and that is a very good reason why we should deal with the wine and brandy duties. But. irrespective of political justice, have you considered the fiscal consequences which must accrue if you persist in lessening the indirect taxation upon the Chinese tea or the French wine, and at the same time leave the enormous im post that exists upon the malt and the spirits thataremade ,t from British produce? (Hear.) That was the . reason that induced the late Government to make up their minds . t , deal with the 11,000,0001. or 12,000,0001. that you rm.: from a tax upon a single crop of the . British farmer. W . gentlemen opposite to increase our com mercewere as desirous as with China, and to expand our trade with Franco ; t we felt that wo had a primary duty to fulfil, and that we were bound simultaneously to reduce the burden and mass of indirect taxation that pressed upon the industry of the British producer. Irrespective of political justice„ ask what must be the fiscal consequences of articless o f fo reign product—like tea and wine — coming in atreduced, and, if the system of the right hon. gentleman be ever con summated, perhaps at nominal duties, teb a a n rley of the British supplanting the b ev e r ages that are produced from th cultivator of the soil? What_ _will become of your revenue of 11,000,00 01 . or 12,000,090 7 (Hoar.) By every consid e - ration of a sound finance, irrespective of political justice— which is a higher consu • ! ora ti o n than sound finance even— you ought a t a re bringing least to take care , when y ou in articles which on tor i n t o competition with arti c l es pro d uced . of the soil, that English cultivator by the into . , s is, as you say, an unrestricted compe tition. which he enters h tis the • (Hear.) But w a course recommended by her '' While they majesty's Ministers- are reducing by more than 100 per cent. the tax upon tea, while they opportunityare pre pared at a favourable. probably to deal also the same manner with wine, while they are all • in foreign articles to enter into competition with articles these British growth that are subject to ad t w articles of the only proposition they make with respect y of 200 per cent., of indirect taxation is to add 500,000i.espect to this amount t,oth is already found so oppressive.(Hear.) c amount which justice of the policy of the Government as to the land with respect to dealing with indirect tstxation. I am askin g n o favour, mind yo u , f or the land.' shall be gl a d if any gentian in this b e h a lf. (H oar.) I extreme views of the subject gentleman can get up, w ith th e mos t of unrestricted competition, and vindicate theirpolicy. if we admit foreign products R ear.) re duced duties, to deal also I say we are bound, i m - i e th tea th and wine at much re which we raise from English articles, r whichaftor immense these taxa t i ol fo reign' products will in all probability be a substitute. (Hear.) I cannot imagine thatthere • is any one who will question the policy, or the wisdom, or the justice of that proposition. (Hear, hear.) Now, if the financial policy of the right hon. gentleman deals with the indirect taxa tion in so unjust a manner as regards the land, what is it doing at tho same time with our direct taxation ? (Hear, hear.) Why, we find this—this is the first thing that moots us :—A farmer finds, in the first place that the duties upon barley indirectly affect the whole soil of the kingdom, and that his product with an immense impost is placed in unrestricted competition with his foreign rivals, who have , to pay a much reduced rate ; he finds, in addition to this, I that the indirect taxation upon the article he produces Is increased ; and what more does ho find when he leaves the 1 domain of indirect taxation? He finds the right hon.. nn gen tleman saying, "You will meet this increased een P°"" auditionl to all with increased indirect imstS and, iu , i r o going to put this, to sustain you in the contest, 11 1,0 '0 . Positron of the cul . upon you an income-tax." That theiss ction 0 _ the f proprietor , tivator of the soil ; what is the ke ee s n oil who has been told to lof the soil—the proprietor ofint rovement of his estate? devote his capital to the p to ' propose a tax which you call (Hear.) You are going dties to land, whichwillact extending the legacy u . tax of a very considerable amount upon all teal pro direct