The Sun. — London, England, 1853-05-28 00:00:00

'ORTING INTELLIC ZNCE. EPSOM RACES—THE OAKS DAY. F RIDAY. —The anticipations of a numerous and fashionable attendance for the Oaks were fulfilled by the aestilt, for although the Downs were not encumbered with an enormous mass of human beings, as on Wed nesday, the company was far more select. The large Proportion of private carriages with fashionable parties on the hill, and the number of ladies on the Grand ;Stand, rendered this a most successful termination of the aneeting. The private stand and the enclosure exhibited the usual array of leaders of the Turf and business men. In the number of distinguished and fashionable visitors were his Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, his Serene Highness Prince Edward of Saxe-Weimar, his Itoyal Highness the Duke de Nemours, his Excellency the French Ambassador, the Duke of Richmond, the Duke and Duchess of Montrose, the Marquises of Exeter and Clanricarde and the Marchioness of Aylesbury, the Earl and Countess of Chesterfield, nthe Earls of Jersey, Derby, Wilton, Granville, desley, B ess b orough, March, Strathmore, Bruce, Longford, Viscount and Viscountess Newport, Vis count and Viscountess Villiers, Viscounts Maidstone, Anson' Curzon, Clifden, Lascelles, an d E n fi e ld , Count Bentevogo, Baron and Baronness Rothschild, Baron de Steinberg, Lords H. Gordon Lennox, George G. Lennox, Alexander G. Lennox, George Manners, M.P., Burghley, Exmouth, Drumlanrig, Dunkellin and Londesborough, Sir Robert Peel, Sir Anthony and Lady Itothschild, Sir Joseph Hawley, Sir Sandford Graham, M o n. George Armitage, Sir Robert Pigot, Hon. Mr. and ' lr s• Lawley, General Anson, Hon. Mn'. Anson, lion. J. Macdonald, Hon. G. S. Smythe, Hon. W. llaget, Major Gae•e, Admiral Rous, Mr. Greville, Colonel Peel. Mr. b Knightley, M.P., Mr. E. Mills, Mr. Cecil lieneage, &c. , T his morning though fine was exc ee di ng ly c l ose an d a tr Y, and c er t a i n i n di cat i ons o f an approaching thun erstorni were observed by persons skilled in meteorolo gical prognosticso chage hwever, took place in t he weather till • after the n Oaks o rsce, when the rain 1 3 . e gati suddenly to descend, accompanied by thunder and ightning, and so violent was the storm, that it caused a general rush of the company to every available place of °belies. The Grand Stand and all the booths on the course were instantaneously filled to suffocatio n , but / _ l ,nabers, una b le to get under cover, were thorou g hly 11renched in a very few minutes. For nearly an hour the rain fell incessantly, and the last two races were run 14 a Perfect e. delu •Lhis unexpect g ed and disagreeable finish to the day's 2 ° /*t caused a hasty retreat from the Downs, covered o rri ages and ca b s rose su dd en ly t o a p rem i um , w hil s t en vehicles were at a serious discount. iit The contrast of the scene and the actors concerned in Was Singularlystriking, that which was hot dust in shemorning was now thick mud, ankle deep ; and in- t"ki of the gay summer costumes, nothing was now to seen but drenched and dripping figures huddled up in I u a te, cloak s , and rugs ; or crouching together under ebrellas close. • So fair an opening has seldom had so foul a T he Race of the day—the Oaks—was won withre markable:arkable ease b y Catherine Hayes. For the last three -41//arters of a mile it was very evident that she had her -:va hl quite safe. After making the turn into the N . str aight, she went on with a decided lead, Mistletoe, -Lnentnaore Lass, and The Queen, the next three fa 17ciirites, were even then toiling after her in vain. Soon afterwards they were distinctly beaten off. h The rep or t t h at s h e h a d b een so ld b y Mr. Wauchope ad not the slightest foundation in truth. , pi gubjoin e d are accurate d eta il s o f t h e day ' s sport : I " D e Memb ers ' Pl a t e o f 50 sovs ; th ree - yr - o ld s, 7st 41b ; I.°ll r, Bst 101 b ; five, 9st 211 ; six and aged, 9st 31b ; Mares allowed 51b and geldings 31b ; maiden four-yr °l-de allowed 71b, five and upwards, 101 b. The winner to be sold for 200 sovs, if demanded. One mil, and a Lo quarter. d. J. Scott's Young Englaand, 6 yrs, 9st (Whitehouse) 1 ' 1 4 1 • a- Daws on ' s H ones ty, 5 y rs , Bst lib ...(B ar k er) 2 i t r Coop er ' s D es d emona , 3 yrs, Est 131 b ... (Wells) 3 r • 'Vickers' s P sa lt ery , 3 yrs, 6st 131 b (Castleman) 4 Petting —Even on Desdemona, 5 to 2 agst Young ti n n g„ l artd, 9 to 2 agst Honesty, and 5 to 1 ags t P sa lt ery. ,1 0 i - " e PY made play, and after the first half-mile was . .wh e e n •-‘ 13 3 , Young England, who waited to the distance, b he went in advance, and finally won very easily 11:4 l ength and a half ; a good race for second place, 1 ki4estY beating Desdemona by a head, and a neck only '.ivir v een third and fourth. The winner was claimed. . A e n ,Qucts STAKES of 50 sovs. each, h ft, for three-yr-old ; "4 ", 8s 71b each ; the owner of the second filly to 1 -, - "eive 100 soya. out of the stakes. New Course. 4 r __Mlle and a half. 141 subs. ' Wauchope's Catherine Hayes, by Lanercost /* (Marlow) 1 1 .13 / 1 11 Exeter' s D ove , by Woodpigeon (S. Rogers) 2 ..ord Glasgow's f by Don John, out of Miss Sarah (Pettit) 3 ii t ." •M. Stanley's Nicotine, by lon (A. Day) 4 (4 s-cie following also ran : ) i r r e r ne .Th r a i (F. Butler) 0 A.nson's Lady Margaret -"• E. Cooper's Miss Tennyson...(Bartholomew) 0 r • Park er ' s E ngland ' s Beauty (H . G oater) 0 1.45 rd Glasgow's C oa lition (Whitehouse) 0 ci•tlExeter' s Koh-i-noorl (Norman) 0 •hartn Rothschild 's Lady Louisa (Simpson) 0 4 1 . • Rothschild' s Mentmore Lass (Charlton) 0 Grevale's Exhibition (Flatman) 0 lirr. Wentwo r th' s M a b e ll a s• J • M. Stanley's Hybla (Marson) 0 a Qr Mislotoe (Templeman) 0 (L. 'Y offenden'a The Qu een W ynne) 0 " i Ptain Scott's Helena (D. Wynne) 0 . t /letting at starting-5 t o 4 ags t C at h er i ne Hayes, 2 I -4 1 a gs t Misletoe, 7 t o 1 ags t M en t more L ass, 12 to 1 ht The Queen, 20 to 1 agst Lady Mar gare t, 20 to 1 81 ' England's 3eauty, 40 to 1 agst Dove. After the 4 oa.l parade and canter, they drew together at the post, ed a beautiful start was made at the first signal. Lady k lu4 isa, with Koh-i-noor, Mistletoe, d Catherine Hayes, the running to .011 Miss Sarah filly, well up, made e Mile -post, where the lead was taken by Misletoe ; I.'.' tl lerine H a yes lying at her quarters on the left, and t o noor on the r ight . In going down the hill to Tat t., Misletoe began to decline, and at the ).ro she dropped back, leaving the lead with Catherine 410 ' Ye s, and the race from that point was no longer in 8 114 1 0 1 t bt • At the stand, Dove, who had been lying off, Cl ue °P, followed by Miss Sarah filly, Nicotine, and the c) ; Catheri ne Hayes, however, maintained her lead thi co enbe, winnin easil b a length nd a half , t e d ating the third by a length — as head between ti t i t ' and fourth. The Queen was fifth, and Mabella . "'„ others were very widely scattered. Run in 11. 1 , 1311 -• .3 sec. Amount of the stakes 3,800/. •—•;:i74l extra. o 50 sovs, (handicap), for all ages mile•'liners extra. New T.Y.C. Three-quarters of a 1,1 1 : Salt's Ventre-a-terre, 5 yrs, 7st 21b...(Charlton) 1 4,tiltin's Heroine, aged, Bst 71b (Thick) 2 ▪ lielarnere's Madame Landeau, 3 yrs, 7st 4lb The f (Ashmall) 3 th , 4 allowing also ran •.—Major Bringhurst's Yr.a, Bst (T. Sherwood) ; Mr. Hornsby's Blonde', et 91b (Wakefield) ; Mr. Higgins's Tilshead Lass, Vi r e ; et 91b (S. Steggles) ; Mr. Farrance's Woodyeates, st 2 111 (J. Goater). ~,914,41 , 11 g -7 to 4 agst Madame Landeau, 2 to 1 agst ge ro i"u- Lass, 4 to 1 each agst Ventre-a-terre and Nsa ile " Won b two lengths. Same distance between 'tklastand third? Puritan's number was put up, but at ~I % ted moment it was withdrawn. The proceeding 4.) 1 , tv B oole severe comments. add ed . ? OAKS STAKES of 5 sovs. each, with 50 x :kei two-yr-olds and upwards. Optional selling r• Half-a-miie. 16 subs. Vermuth, 5 rs y(5O/.), 7st 71b otr, (G. E. Sharp) 1 ." g e r's Leybourne, 5 yrs (50/.), Bst 81b 4 4 . (S. Rogers) 2 following's'ertastron Sabra,4 yrs (50/.), 7st 91b (Sabin) 3 (tet. ioz 7at 61 gl ran :—Mr. Magenis's Janina, 4 yrs s .), 54 ; Mr. Jordan's Jessamine, 2 yrs 112, ((Charl ton) uinton) ; Mr. Rogers's Otranto, 2 yrs (50/.), arried sst 61b) (S. Steggles) • Mr. J. S. Dou jil ya y, 2 yrs (50/.), sst (Fordharn') ; Mr. Stewart's 'z4tiPu rit Yrs ( 5 01.), 6st 121 b (Ashmall) ; Mr. Darling, ss tc4 4 yrs (501.), 7st lllb (Flatman) ; Captain E st Ph (0 1 .°Y The C ounse ll or —Mi ss L ucy, 5 yrs (50/.), ) .211Pord e lve r) ; Mr. Carter's Zul e ik a filly, 2 yrs (501.), )1, ; Mr. French's Antonina, 3 yrs (50/.), fist yrg • ; Mr. Dela,mere's cby Epiru s —E m p ress , 2 tij e . 21b (Cresswell) ; Mr. Bickham's Saville, 4 let 911 (J. Goater) • Mr. Hodgson's Eccen boiltietin'ft,Yl'Bs(sol.), Est 71b (Halls). a w rna 4 1 , to 2 agst Puritan, 4to 1 each agst Ley 1/44‘r ea t`i Antonia, 6 to 1 agst Janina. Mr. Rogers 'V l a, a, ° win. With Otranto. Vermuth, Leybourne, fa l , o ranto lay in front to the distance, where ke toi Lt by cam out, and the race terminated in her 11sa' and length. Same distance between the oft 'turd. Otranto a bad fourth. The others • 4/ ‘ Visi T x ,9Rs' PLATE of 100 sovs (handicap), for air. I,of mil e rs extra. New T.Y.C. Three-quar ne' • 114 8 Paux-pas, by Taurus, sTat 101 b yrs,g spit r . ' V arks r , a Sweetheart (Flatman) 1 weetheart, 6 yrs, 6st 4lb (Wells) 2 ,b'_extrax • Ventre-h-terre, 5 yrs, Est 71b (including kers ii o c_ (Ashman) 3 also ran :—Mr. Wiggan's Forester, 1 11 . or (- Wakefield); Mr. J. S. Douglas's too , ° hill, yrs; 7st 71b, (Collins) Mr. Drinkald's ites4,11101„1/4,cd, let 51b' (G. E. Sharp) ; Mr. Shrimp kt4 !` Thel in aa Maid 4t e er i ot 5 , 3 yrs, 7st 411, (Rice) ; Mr. Ma , yrs, Est 1311 (Charlton) Mr. Ser kiStlll3`,"liettai yrs, fist 61b (S. Steggles) ; Mr. R. y; 4 : B 4 f t b j y . 'a tPPLCt on 4 yrs, sst 101 b (J. Goater) I letti, 7 1h 03ufaiercules, out of Miss Shirley (h.b.), 44/%114 - '6 to r 1') p o aod gat The Heriot, sto 1 each agst la 4o ll ttil, I ; s a t ,er. w uz o - P: 8, , 6 to 1 each agst Ventre-'a-terse cleverly by three-quarters of a hakee_th.eart beating Ventre-h-terro for second it length. The others tailed off. to j . -.1. ON' THE ST. LEGER. 6 to Zg g B s t t I%.est Autralian. seneas. Th© 114,01INTG ------- h gt , ree FIXTURES FOR JUNE. . Within parenthesis denote the number of 1,,,,,, IN. iar, l , A . day's racing. ANoll (121\'1‘tdXent (1) 1 Lamberton (1) 22 23 tiZot (4$ ! .••••••• ...... 2 S tockbridge (1) 23 13 1,1,1,1:oil i ',;, ••• " • ......... 7 Harrogate (2) 24 Pt:1,11- -,49•••••• ........ 15 Knighton t 44 3', 411 24 •ii)i,,,'3' (1) - ' —e. (2)...15 Winchester (1) 1 44.4 - 7 (1) . "••• ••••• • • •.16 Newcastle (3) 2B ltakft •,....... .... 22 Ludlow (2) ...... 30 d ............ 22 IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT , HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Mr. Robert Owen in favour of opening the Crystal Palace on Sunday as a rival to the gin palace. The Earl of CARLISLE presented petitions from Hull and Bristol praying for the prohibition of the sale of intoxicating liquors on Sunday. THE TURKISH QUESTION. The Earl of MALMESBURY rose, pursuant to notice, to put a question to the Government respecting the negotiations now pending between Russia and the Porte. He regretted to say that, whatever might be the issue of events, the appearance of events did not justify the promise and assurance which the Foreign Secretary had given their lordships on a former occasion. On that occasion it was stated that the whole object of Prince Menschikoff's embassy was simply the settle ment of the question of the Holy Places, and the public anxiety was, in consequence, very much alle viated ; but i since the speech of the noble earl, Prince Menschikoff had come forward with an entirely different demand, and what was now required was that the Porte should sign a treaty with Russia, guaranteeing to the Greek subjects of the Porte the continuance of all the rights and privileges which had been at any time granted to them by the Sultan. It was evident that if such a treaty were signed, the Em peror of Russia would become the arbiter between the Porte and its subjects. He wished to ask whether the instructions given to Lord Stratford were identical with those given to the French Ambassador at Constantinople, and whether the ambassadors of this country and France were acting together in supporting and encouraging the Porte at the present emergency. The Earl of CLARENDON said that at the present moment he was sure both the noble lords opposite and the house, would not insist on pressing him for infor mation which it would be inconvenient for the public service at this moment to give. (Hear, hear.) The latest official information from Lord Stratford was of the date of the 9th instant, and brought. intelli gence of the settlement of the question of the Holy Places. The Government had no further information from Constantinople beyond that which was open to the public at large, and useful as the electric telegraph was, had _its _inconveniences, and the rumours - Which transmitted were not alWays to be relied on. He could assure the house that the views of her Majesty's Government had not changed respecting the necessity of upholding the Turkish empire. The views of the French and English Governments were identical on this subject, and there was not the slightest doubt that the French and English ambassadors were acting in concert together at Constantinople for the support of the Turkish Government. The Earl of HARD WICKE thought that sufficiently strong measures had not been taken for the support and encouragement of the Porte. If a demonstration of force had been made by the English and French Governments in concert, we should never have heard of the imperious and insulting tone which had been assumed towards the Turkish Government. Lord BEAUMONT, though he joined in the regret of the noble earl opposite, thought there would be no difficulty in the final peaceable settlement of the question. He was glad to hear the speeches of the two noble lords opposte, because they showed that if Russia should pro ceed, his noble friend would be firmly backed in an ac tive policy by both sides of the house. (Hear, hear.) Lord BROUGHAM suggested the propriety, or at any rate the great convenience, of here closing this dis cussion, which was premature at all events— (hear, hear)—inasmuch as they were in absolute ignorance of nine parts out of ten of the whole facts of the case ;' and which might be mischievous, inasmuch as there were now pending negotiations on the subject which were as important as they were difficult, and as delicate as they were important. Considering the evident inutility and the possible mischief of such a discussion, he thought they should let it drop. (Hear, hear.) THE SUCCESSION DUTIES. The Earl of MALMESBURY then rose, in pursuance of notice to move for a select committee to inquire into the probable effect of extending to the case of successions to real property, and property under settlement, the stamp duties now payable in respect of legacies. He said, in making this motion, he could state with the utmost sin cerity and frankness that he did so without the slightest portion of party or political spirit ; and he promised their lordships that so far as he was concerned no atom of that element should be introduced into the question. He must commence by observing that he thought that house was the most fitting place for a preparatory inquiry on this im portant subject, because it was composed of persons who were not personally interested in the matter, and who could not therefore be actuated by selfish feelings. When the last Government retired, in consequence of their finan cial policy being disproved of by the House of Commons, it was to be expected that their successors would take up the subject of finance, especially as the public had for seve ral years taken more interest in that branch of public ques tions than in any other. But he (the Earl of Malmesbury) did not expect that Mr. Gladstone would have dealt with the subject of a succession tax upon real and settled pro perty, inasmuch as he thought the difficulties of that subject were not exaggerated when painted in such vivid colours by almost every statesman who had lived during the last half century. But the right hon. gentleman had boldly met the difficulties face to face, and in a bill which was now printed he proposed that a succession tax on real property should become Dart of the, law of th e land. He would at once admit the abstract justice of such a tax. The question was first one of necessity, and secondly one of possibility, and it was for the Legisla ture to decide on both points. It appeared to him that the question of succession to realty, considered per se, was one on which both the country and the Houses of Parliament was profoundly igno rant; at least they were ignorant on that subject as compared with many others which had of late years occu pied public attention. The question had not been brought before the houses of Parliament since the year 1796, a lapse of time including two generations, and, without wishing to cast the slightest imputation on those who had taken part in the debates in another place, he must say that he thought much comparative ignorance had been exhibited. It appeared to him that under such circum stances no time should be lost in securing in some manner the utmost information that could be obtained as to the probable working of the proposition of Mr. Gladstone, It was a very great advantage in investigations of this kind that their lordships could examine witnesses before the committee on oath ; and it was for this reason that he asked their lordships to grant a committee, before which they might examine the first solicitors and conveyancers in the country—men of great experience in such matters— who would give such information as might be useful both to that and to the other House of Parliament. Though he was not prepared to offer any opposition to the mea sure without inquiry, yet he must say that there were ex tant opinions which should at least warn their lordships against rashly supporting it. The last time that the ques tion was brought-before Parliament was the 21st of April, 1796, when Mr. Pitt proposed that a succession tax should be imposed on real property. Now, let their lordships mark what events were taking place at that period. Buo naparte was at that moment crossing the Alps into Italy ; Nelson had not gained those great victories which were to sweep the French nation into the sea; an invasion seemed not unlikely to take place. Under such circumstances it was impossible not to feel that almost any tax was justi fied by the emergency. When Mr. Pitt brought forward his proposition, he was opposed by whom ? By Mr. She ridan, Mr. Grey, and Mr. Fox. It had been asserted in the other house that Mr. Pitt was beaten by the country party; but that was not the fact. The first person who opposed the motion was Mr. Alderman New man who made a joke upon the occasion, by say ing that, if it were carried, though England might be the best country to live in, it would be the worst to die in. (Laughter.) Mr. Sheridan said it was the most execrable measure of finance that had ever come before Parliament. He (the Earl of Malmesbury) considered it a war tax, and thought that nothing but the most urgent necessity could justify it; and it was, in fact, on such a necessity that Mr. Pitt rested his d e f e nce. His first im pression on hearing of a succession tax was that it would entirely change the nature of a real estate. (Hear, hear.) Their lordships did not hold now, as they formerly did, directly under the erown. In former days the crown could send a commission (indeed this was the condition of tenure) to value the rental and take a succession tax from the estate ; but many of their lordships, and many small free holders, had inherited their estates with an a b so l u t e r i g ht to sell, to give a way, or to mortgage ; and the entire nature of their property would be changed if a succession tax had to be paid before the heir came into possession. In that case an estate in fee would be nothing more than an estate renewable on the payment of a fine. It was but justice to the right hon. gentleman to say that he had not overlooked the difficulties of the question, and that he had already met some of them. There was one point on which the right hon. gentleman was entirely mistaken. He stated that he considered the term of a generation to be 30 years. That he was wrong in that assumption was evident from the fact that at the assurance offices the average of the lives assured was taken at about 7 years, and their lordships knew from the records of their own families that it was quite a mistake to calculate on a generation of 30 years. of ,t ah n t a hdt egreatthatprincipalaf rnauewa as andrwg e u r m em e c n uo t en u n i s h o moref t t t h r h t ed t e nrhs theoi v n e . g p (He re ne s ta e lrre n m t .)a sy n s Ow te naa m e machinery was required. On that point he (the Earl of Malmesbury) had examined several solicitors, and they all told him that there was great exaggeration on the subject of frauds. It was n o t lik ely, they said, that many two men would seek to eva d e the succession tax by a deed of gift during theiroewnoniliyvehsa.d Obfadfivesosruiceih tors whom he consulted, one cases; and in that instance the oases occurred irtth ireper!, of a thirty-four years' practice. With their lordships' mission, he would point out som e o f th e most evident diffi culties of carrying out the Government scheme. If the bill passed, what would be the position of properties heavily mor tgaged—mortgaged to the extent of three-fourths of the rental? (Hear, hear.) The heir of such an estate would be placed between two fires—the mortgagee on the one side and the Government on the other. At first it was proposed that the assessment should be restricted to four years. It was true that a year of grace had been added ; but, as had been well observed by a nobleman on the cross benches, if the period were five years, why should it not be ten, and if ten why should it not be twenty or thirty ? The object of the Chancellor of the Exchequer being to get as much as possible during the life of the owner, the best thing for the right hon. gentleman would be for every owner to die after he had held the property for four years. (Laughter.) There was one point which had struck him very forcibly. He saw no special provision in the bill for the case of an officer falling in action. He could men tion instances in which two or three brothers had each fallen on the field of battle within a short period, each, too, leaving children almost wholly dependent on them for support. Such cases were, during the last war, espe cially frequent in the highlands of Scotland ; and, in such cases, when an officer who died in the service of his country left a croft, producing perhaps 100/. a-year, would it be just or decent for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to put his hands in the pockets of the orphan ? (Hear, hear.) What had staggered him, and he believed the public also, most, was the attack made on settlements. In the eye of the law such property amounted to a purchase. Many men who had been married for thirty years or more had not yet obtained the property of the wife settled at the time of the marriage. - Upon such persons the operation of this tea would bit retrospective and retroactive; the law a division. But he would tell the noble earl why they had not been opposed in the House of Commons. They had not been opposed, because the opposition in that house did not wish to throw impediments in the way of public business, and to delay that stage of the measure till after the holidays. They therefore consented to waive their opposition, and the resolutions passed without dis cussion. And because they did so, the noble earl thought it decent to raise a triumphant argument from that cir cumstance. Another reason why they waived opposition was that it was a very common thing to take the discus sion or to raise opposition to a formal stage of a measure, but to wait till the bill had been introduced and its prin ciples and details fully explained. But he doubted if the House of Commons would have abstained from opposing the measure if they could have foreseen the use—not to use a stronger word—which had been made of that forbearance. But since t 1 • Chancellor of the Exchequer made his speech great changes had been made in the bill. (Hear, hear.) And if his noble friend asked for an inquiry at once, he would probably be told, " you don't know what the mea sure is ; its principle may be changed" —no, not its prin ciple, for the present Government never changed its prin ciples—(laughter)—but, at all events, its details may be changed, and we must be allowed to mature and consider the form in which it is ultimately to be submitted to Par liament. (Hear, hear.) Within what time did the noble earl think it would be right to make a motion for inquiry after the bill had been to framed. He had the bill in his hands it was true, but he saw it for the first time last night, it having been ordered to be printed only on the 23d of May, and that was the first intimation which he had of the machinery at all events by which the measure was to be carried into effect. The bill had 55 clauses, and it contained so many legal details that the members of the legal profession would, he had no doubt, make a consid era bl e pro fi t out of the measure, so that they would be to some extent remunerated for the losses which recent legislation on other subjects had caused them. (Hear, hear.) The noble earl said that he should see with great regret the rejection of the measure by their lordships on the second reading ; he said it was perfectly competent for their lordships to reject the measure on the second reading, but he said that they could not propose any amendment on it in committee. He (Lord Derby) begged leave to differ from the noble earl on that point, It was perfectly competent for their lordships to make amend ments in committee, though, according to the principle which guided the House of Commons, the bill would then not be accepted by them, and the consequence would be that the bill would be sacrificed unless the House of Com mons consented to make such alterations as would meet at all events the reasonable objections urged by their lord ships. (Hear.) It was therefore the more necessary that their lordships should grant an inquiry now, in order that when the bill was in committ ee th ere might be less chance of making such amendments as would interfere with the privileges of the House of Commons. (Hear.) They could not justly be ch a r ge d with being -precipitate, or sitting in judgment upon they knew not what. If they had post poned their inquiry into the merits of this case to a later period, they should have been told that they were dealing with it too late, that they could not make amendments without interfering with the privileges of the house, or seriously interferin g w ith th e fi nancial propositions ofthe Government. As to the immense success attained by the financial projects of the present Chancellor of the Ex chequer, he must be permitted to doubt whether they had been received with that degree of favour which the Go vernment anticipated. He had heard it whispered that, after dealing as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had done, with very many millions of stock, the substantial saving from the conversion would be only some 400,0001., and that his financial resolutions were regarded in the city as only so much waste paper. The right hon. gentleman was, no doubt, a man of great abilities ; it might not be his fault that his scheme had not met with greater success. He (Lord Derby) did not condemn it ; but he doubted whether it was an exemplification of that immense and overwhelming success which led the noble earl (Aberdeen) to say that such a Chancellor of the Exchequer had never yet been seen, that such success had never been attained by any financial measure, and that he and his colleagues were the only. parties to conduct the Government. (Hear, and laughter.) In order to take off the income tax in 1 860—which he hoped their lordships would live to see—(laughter)—it was said that it was essential to impose this tax on successions; but were they quite sure that the Chancellor of the Exchequer's calculations as to the amount of income to be derived from this tax to be correct ? He calculated that property changed hands by succession once in 30 years upon an average. Of this they might judge by the recurrence of the tax on personal property ; and the calculation was that about one-sixteenth of all the personal property in the country was brought to tax every year in consequence of the legacy duty. If that were so, the pro bable duration of each succession to personal property was an average of 16 years, not of 30. (Hear, hear.) He was at a loss to know what there was in landed property that should render the succession more slow than to personal property, or how a person inheriting both kinds of property could at his decease give a successionto the one in a period of 16 years, and to the other in 30 years. In that case in his capacity as an owner of real property, he must outlive himself by 14 years as an owner of personal pro perty. (Laughter.) At all events, it was a prima facie reason to doubt whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not exaggerated by nearly one half the period of the recurrence of successions, and consequently under-rated by about one-half the amount of annual income that would accrue to him under that tax. As to the duration of life, let him look at the members of that house. He had known cases in the last few years where to a very large landed property there were three successions, and it Was a question of 48 hours whether there would not be a fourth succession, within a period of less than two years. A noble friend of his, now one of the youngest members of the house, succeeded to a propertyto which there had been three successions in two years, and there would have been a fourth but for a son dying 48 hours before his father. Had he survived his father, there would have been four successions in two years, and four inflictions of the tax gatherers' demand on that property. The noble earl near him (Malmesbury) reminded him of another case in his own person; he was the fourth successor to the property he held in the course of three years. Looking at the necessary ex pense of such successions, and the amount of this tax on a large property, he would ask what those four successors would have had to live upon daring the first six months if this bill had been in operation ? The Roble earl opposite had made no attempt to answer his noble friend on this or any other point. There was the case of persons coming into possession as tenants for life, of heir-looms,which were often of immense value. Suppose any of their lordships to be in possession, as an hereditary jewel, of the Koh-i-noor —whatever its value it might be, one or two millions ster ling, he would have to pay the tax on the value of that jewel, measured by the probable duration of his life; and on his death his successor would have to pay again on it — though neither one nor the other could realise a single shilling out of it, still they must pay. There was no pri vate property in England or in the world that could stand two or three successive taxes on two or three successive in heritances of the Koh-i-noor. Take a more ordinary case— pictures, books, or plate. He did not complain of the tax upon succession, to that a man could realise, and formed a portion of his property ; but he complained that under the operation of this act he was taxed for that which he could not avoid receiving, which he h a d no means of part ing with, no m eans o f raising a value from, even for the purpose of defraying the tax itself. (Hear, hear.) If 100,0001. was left to a man, he was taxed 3,000/., and en- I joyed the 97,000/. ' • but if he wer e t axe d upon 100,0001. worth of pictures, the pictures might . hang upon his walls, and he could not sell them, though it might be a great hardship and grievance to part with pictures that had been long in his family, and to which more than ordinary value was attached. But if they brought him in nothing, and were a constant sourca of expense, it was a gross injustice to put properties of that description on the same footing, and subject them to the same tax as 100,0001. in the funds, or 100,0001. worth of property which might be realised and converted into money at any moment. (Hear, hear.) Take the case of a tontine, to which there were 100 sub- Oscfribeeorsur,sea, as ndth e e aeh las l t if survivor in, wasr upon that additional i n t eres t , though none b u t th e ulti mate survivor would ever d er i ve any real benef i t . (H ear , hear.) Then there w as th e case of annuit i es. It w as a gross injustice to l ev y a f resh tax on the owner o f the property charged with a nnu iti es as each o f th em fell in. The owner of a land e d property subject to and dach would survivor be wouldtaxed acquire a new ben e fi c i a l i nterest, an nuities must, as each o f th em fell in, present eert aia himself before the taxing officer to declare the contingent benefit he derived from that source ' • then be was taxed on the value of that annuity measured by the probable duration of his life ; and this was to be repeated upon every single annuity. Could there be a system calculated to produce more perpetual harass and annoyance than this system of taxation upon what the Chancellor of the Exchequer t h r e u a a r t . ) would hbaed dealtbee n curious with by to see see bill how property . There were was pleased to call success i ons to bene fi c i a l interests ? under trust numberless cases in whi c h th ere were secre t f a mily trusts, for the purpose o f prov idi ng for relations or descend ants, with regard to which no hu m an being not in the family itself was cogn i san t o f th e trust or o f the trustees. Many of their lord s hip s m i g ht k now th i s f rom having been in the position of trustees. In such cases the trustees were unknown ; they were not discoverable by the will, registration of deed s of they could only be got at by a settlement, which would involve an nor by any other m eans • immense amount of inquisitorial interference with the title deeds of property, and might lead their lordships and owners of landed property into the most serious difficulties and embarrassments. It was only by this means that they were discoverable, or by that more violent measure pro posed in the bill—making it obligatory on the trustee to declare that which he had no means of doing, the amount of property for which he was acting as trustee. (Hear, hear.) It was not beside the question to look into these private to a right details ; and he contend e d th a t nothing but the most out rageous tyranny and intol era ble inquisition into affairs would ever enabl e th e m to approximate estimate of this description of property. (Hear, hear.) He did not ask their lo r dships to rej ect bill, the but to call for the advice and assistance of able men — the most ex perienced solicitors—men conversant with business an d with the legal and financial details involved in the bill— to know what would be the result of its operation upon the great and small landed pro perties of this coun t ry . They ought to know from these men what was to be the was to be perty, whether the character of p roperty the p urpose of getting an altoge ther changed in this country, for result with regard to settlement and succession to pro perty, Par liament should think fit, six years hence, getting rid of the income tax, the Government themselves_ having . already. additional 400,000/. of revenue, and by that means, if laid the ground for its continuance by declaring the neces sityctical working of this bill—how it would affect the great interests wanted them to inquire into the pr, of the country of taking o ff f u rther indirect taxes. (Hear.) He The result of the inquiry might show that the oppression would be so intolerable, the result so injurious in a political and social sense, and the —with what machinery it could be carried into eff ec t w ith the least vexation and difficulty. imposed in prefe rence t o if it fell upon landed and this tax upon success if uncertain duration of advantages in a financial point of of view so inconsiderable, that some other tax ought to real property,—not based fair u send legitimate calculation of human life, but upon a and ought in equity, by comparison with the d great exigencies of the national kinds, to contribute to the ur r-e e a n l s p u m po p n ert pr y operty of all other th • revenue. That was more, if they shrank from such an that which all landed sn competency ; inquiry withinear lordship? in quiry,tamely to sit down and say, that because the they were had sanctioned a measure which might House of Commons might not produce gross injus ice—a measure which they would na not do their duty to their country. If or of society of which their or 'pa re componen dsh' we t arts--they would therefore shut their eyes, important p . might cut at the very root t and foundation of those classics remark, or inquiry, they would abdicate the high position lich they ought to hold, and which he trusted they would and bow their heads, and pass the bill without observation, the opinions and proposed legislation of the House of Com mons,he trusted that upon every occasion they should w hol l d. Whilst they looked with deference and respect to exercise their own independent judgment, and not fear to s ay whether upon the whole the adoption or rejection of thin bill would be the greater evil — at all 01 , 01103, that they would, in fact, be ex post facto, and every one of their lordships who had not yet obtained the fortune of his wife would have to pay the succession tax after they had made what. was in the eye of the law a purchase of the property. (Hear, hear.) In the case of corporations the tax was not to be retrospective ; a corporation was only to pay upon what it might get after the passing of the bill. He did not understand how the right hon. gentleman meant to deal with the property of the Church. If the Church were not exempted, a prelate on succeeding, as he did not stand in the position of a blood relation, would have to pay 10 per cent. ; and, though he might be reminded that the bishops were now paid a fixed salary, and be told that the tax must, therefore, be paid by the Ecclesiastical Commis sioners, that remark was not applicable to the working clergy. There was another class of property which was not mentioned in the bill; ho referred to heirlooms. By " heirlooms " he meant books, pictures, plate, and so on, left to a man who held for life an estate entailed on a son or a brother. If the bill was carried out consistently, there must be a valuation of such objects; and thus the party would have to pay a tax on property which he could neither sell nor mortgage. He perceived that the timber was to be valued and taxed on succession. He appealed to any of their lordships who had ever purchased or sold an estate, whether the trouble and expense of timber valua tions ware not enormous? (Hear.) In this case there might be a valuation of the timber cut down every two or three years ; and if the Government were not satisfied with the assessment, they would have a right to send a valuer of their own ; and he warned their lordships to beware, lest under a constitutional form of Government they should become subject to laws as severe as any ever propounded by the most despotic monarch. (Hear, hear.) Again, the valuation of mines could not easily be ascertained, because of the uncertainty of the extent of ore existing underground. Then, when a man purchased a reversion, and it fell in, the succession tax was to be paid upon it. (Hear.) So also with respect to jointures and legacies. If a man left a legacy of 1001. a-year to his butler, a succession tax of 10 per cent. was paid upon it, and when it reverted back, 10 per cent. was also to be paid. Where was the justice in that ? (Hear.) It was very customary in this country for a man to leave 5,0001.,10,0001., 15,0001., or 20,0001., to his younger children. He should like to know how the Chan cellor of the Exchequer proposed to treat the person com ing into the property in these cases. The difficulties ap peared to him to be endless, and under these circumstances it was absolutely necessary that the subject should be in vestigated by a committee before the bill proceeded fur ther in either house of Parliament. The bill set up a machinery for carrying the system into operation which was in the nature of a tremendous inquisition. A man was made liable to heavy penalties if he did not give a full and true account to commissioners of his liability to the duty, and the amount for which he was liable, and ad ditional penalties were imposed for every month after the first mouth if he did not give such information. (Hear.) He had no hesitation in saying that it was the most tre mendously inquisitorial bill that ever was proposed. (Hear.) If it passed, who in God's name, would accept the situation of trustee or guardian ? (Hear.) He be lieved that it would operate most iijuriously on the landed property, and consequently on the constitution of the country. Take the case of a family whose name would be immortal in the annals of this country. After the battle of Trafalgar the nation settled an estate on Lord Nelson, and it so happened that since 1805 there had been three collateral successions in that family. If this act bad been in operation during that period this property which had been bestowed for services rendered the country would have been taxed three several times to the extent of 3 per cent. (Hear.) He looked with apprehension to this tax also because it was to be a permanent tax, and because it offered no security that it would not be increased when ever the Chancellor of the Exchequer wanted money. It was because he was convinced a great deal of ignorance prevailed on this subject that he ;sked for a collimates. If their lordships grinted him a committee he would go into that committee with a mind open to conviction ; and if he found that the tax was one for which good reasons could be alleged, he would join with those who felt ad miration for Mr. Gladstone, and would give him credit for finding the means of adding to the revenue of the country without doing injustice to any class. (Hear, hear.) The Earl of ABERDEEN said that the motion of the noble earl commended itself by a certain degree of plausi bility, for at first sight it did not seem unreasonable that a measure so important, so difficult, so complicated, and so personally interesting to their lordships, should undergo such an inquiry as that for which the noble earl asked. Yet there were reasons which should, he thought, induce their lordships not to support the motion of the noble earl. They were such, at all events, as should prevent him from giving the slightest encouragement to such a proposition. First he begged to call attention to the time at which the motion was made. If this had been quite a new system of financial policy, upon which the Legislators had to make up their minds before coming to a decision, there might be some reason for the motion. But the proposition of the Government had been stated in great detail by his right hon. friend five or six weeks ago in the House of Commons, and the resolutions proposed on the subject had been car ried a fortnight ago without any division. (" Hear," from the Earl of Derby.) That being so, it would be impossible to accede to the proposition for inquiry now made by the noble earl, without also joining in the doubt, and the more than doubt, which the noble earl expressed of the wisdom and justice of the measure. Now, happen what might, their lordships might appoint a committee if they thought fit; but nothing should induce him to express any doubt of the wisdom and justice and equity of the proposal of his right hon friend. (Hear.) That proposal was now before the House of Commons in the form of a bill, and the speech of the noble earl was made as if that measure had been before their lordships' house, and stood for a second reading, (Hear, hear.) The house must be aware that whether the committee was appointed or not, and whatever the result at which it might arrive, they could not alter one tittle of the measure without infringing on the privileges of the other house. (Hear.) No doubt it was perfectly com petent for their lordships to throw the bill out on the second reading—(hear, hear)—but he need not say how deeply ho should regret the risk to their lordships' house, as well as to the country, from the adop tion of so rash and impolitic a course. (Hear, hear.) The noble earl had fairly told them that he asked for a com mittee with a viow of disproving the contents of the bill, but even the noble earl did not deny the justice of the proposition. The noble earl only referred to the difficul ties of execution in the way of the measure, and ho re ferred, in support of his view, to the authority of Mr. Fox and Mr. Sheridan. Now, with all due respect to the authority of Mr. Fox and Mr. Sheridan, he believed they had made great progress, especially in financial principle;, since their days ; and he thought it was generally admitted that Mr. Pitt was right in the proposition he made. (Hear.) The country has for a long time felt the injustice of the exemption of land from the tax on successions. (Hear.) That feeling was gaining ground daily, and he would ask any one of their lordships if he could candidly say that this exemption could possibly be maintained much longer ? (Hear. hear.) It was true there was no riot, no violence, no outcry at the present moment, but there existed a strong feeling of the injustice and inconsistency of exempt. ing land from a tax which was imposed on all other pro perty. Moreover, this measure 'WM indispensable for the carrying into effect the financial scheme proposed by his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. With out this measure it would not be possible to carry into effect that scheme. The renewal of the income tax for seven years would never have been proposed or thought of unless it was accompanied with the means and obvious facilities for dispensing with that tax at the end of the period if Parliament should think so fit. (Hear, hear.) Neither would it be possible to effect those great and important remissions of duties which would, he hoped, greatly increase the prosperity and comforts of the great body of the people of this country—(hear, hear)—and which secured for the pro position of his right hon. friend a degree of acceptance and popularity which he did ,not see attended any budget in his day. (Cheers.) The noble earl admitted the ability displayed by his right hon. friend, but he ought to have gone farther, and admitted the singular success with which it was attended—(hear)—so far as the opinions pronounced by men of all parties was an evidence of s uccess . The noble earl said that the measure was conceived in a spirit of hostility to the landed, interest, of the country, and would be most injurious to that interest. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) The very same language had been made use of in reference to the measures proposed by Sir R. Peel. (Hear, hear, from the same quarter.) He be lieved that so far from their being injurious or hostile to the landed interest, those measures contributed very much to the safety and freedom with which they were debating at that moment on these benches—(hear, hear)—and he believed that the measure now proposed would be followed by results of a similar kind. It was said of this measure, " here is a Conservative Government who are going to raise 2,000,0001. from the land." Now according to the most accurate calculations that could be made the tax would not produce more than one-fourth of that amount. The noble earl wished to have this inquiry before the measure pro ceeded any further. Did the noble earl think that this was _ _ a practical course to adopt ? Did the noble earl suppose that after the resolutions had been so triumphantly carried in the other house he would be able to resist the progress of the measure by this inquiry which he now proposed. would not fear to say that before they legislated they would at least inquire. (Hear, hear.) Earl GRANVILLE said the noble earl at the head of the Government had been unjustly accused of calling on the house to perform an act of passive obedience, and to vote a measure, not yet introduced, without a full and fair discussion. What the noble earl said was actuated solely by the inteition of taking the part most respectful to the house itself, and most conducive to the future utility of committees of inquiry on all subjects of public interest. The noble earl who proposed this committee could not ex pect that the Government would consent to delay the bill that was to come up from the other house, a bill forming, not the whole, but only a part of that financial scheme which the noble earl had pronounced to be most successful in the other house, and in the whole country. When the noble earl (Derby) attempted to controvert the success of that budget, he could only refer to the fact, that that part of it which had been denounced by his friends in the other house as wanton extravagance, had not been accepted in the City so greedily as might have been anticipated. There was some inconsistency in going clause by clause through a bill which had not yet passed a single stage in the other house ; and the noble earl (Derby) was guilty of a greater inconsistency, by declaring that he had no antipathy against the measure, and only wished for a committee to inquire into its justice and practicability, and then going into detail to show that his opinion was entirely against it. (Hear, hear.) Lord Malmesbury had said that the question had not been brought before Parliament for the last half century, whereas it had been constantly agitated and discussed in the House of Commons. The Earl of MALMESBURY explained. What he had said was, that the question was never brought forward as a formal proposition since 1796 ; and a succession tax on real property had only been advocated because there was one on personalty. Earl GRANVILLE said that made no great difference. In all probability if any proposition had been made by Government it would now have been law ; but the propo sition had been almost annually made by independent members of the house, and full discussions had ensued thereon. The proposition had been met by the same ob jections, but not the very best arguments, by different Chancellors of the Exchequer. As to the unfairness of taking thirty years as the average interval of successions, he would, remind the house that, some time ago, the average value of life in this country was thirty-three years ; and no doubt that value had since improved, particularly among the higher classes. (Hear.) The noble earl had put the case of a minor succeeding to the estate mortgaged to a certain amount, and said that he might not have the means of paying the tax on the succes sion. But the course proposed in the bill was to reduc the gross to the net income, and to levy the tax on that amount ; so that no difficulty would arise in the case sup posed. The noble earl had alluded to the hardship of paying a sum of money on succession to the Koh.i-noor, but there was a clause in the bill which exempted such heirlooms from any tax whatever. (Hear, hear.) The question of timber had been referred to. All ornamental timber, such as shrubberies, would bo exempted from pay ing the tax. With regard to the sale and valuation of timber, the party succeeding would have tkis option. He might either pay the tax upon the average income of a certain number of years, or, if he did not choose to take that alternative, he might have the whole of the timber valued, and then calculate the tax upon the probable dura tion of his life at 3 per cent. The same principle would be adopted with regard to mines, and if there was no value in a mine, no tax would be imposed upon it. As to widows, the case rather broke down. The noble earl said that the son or heir to the person who left the widow would have to pay the tax upon succeeding to the jointure when it came to him from the widow. But it should be remem bered that in valuing the estate, the widows' charge would be taken off the valuation, and when it ultimately de scended to the heir, he had only to pay the tax upon that which he had not received at an earlier period. (Hear.) The same principle would apply where an annuity was set tled on a steward. When it fell in, and the owner of the estate derived an accession of property to that amount, he would pay pro tanto upon that—not 10 per cent.—but ac cording to the degree of consanguinity to the original pro prietor. As to trustees, the machinery of the bill was exactly the same as had existed for more than fifty years with respect to leaseholds, as well as mere money or personal property. During that time th9re . . had been exactly the same machinery, and the same liability ; yet the trustees had executed ,trusts, and, as he was informed, not a single question had arisen in law as to the value of the properties so dealt with. (Hear, hear.) With regard to successions in a short number of years, there would actually be a saving by the proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. In tontines nobody would pay till they actually received the money and be came beneficial successors ; and upon that succession the tax would be paid. Small landed proprietors would be taxed in proportion to their interest in the estate ; and to those the bill would be a positive advantage. He hoped that their lordships would not, after the request of the noble earl at the head of the Government, insist upon having a committee on this question. He did not believe it would weaken the Government the least in carrying out the bill, though it might have an unfortunate effect on public opinion as regarded that house. He entirely agreed with the noble earl opposite in scouting the idea that their lordships could be moved by any petty personal motives ; but there was no doubt that their prejudices—for every body had their prejudices—were bound up with the landed interest. He believed that their lordships' house stood higher in the estimation of the public than it had done almost at any previous time ; and this was owing to the general feeling that their interests were the same as those of all other classes, whatever their station and influence in the country. He should regret to see their lordships adopting any mode of obstructing a measure which was generally approved by the country. If they were to take this course, it could have no practical results beyond throwing discredit upon the inquiries of the committees. Lord ST. LEONARDS said he had never before heard a minister of the crown speak in so minatory a tone as the noble earl, who was not only perfectly satisfied with the work of his own colleagues, but threw out something like a denunciation of any one who attempted to impede the pass ing of a measure which he almost said should pass. His tone was certainly not one which seemed fitted to a de liberative assembly. The noble earl took great credit for what he called the popularity of the measure, and of the Chancellor of the Exchequer who proposed it; but that it had been eminently unsuccessful in one respect no one would deny. What had become of the Exchequer bond ? Had they become what everybody was desirous of possessing ? The right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had made a proposition with regard to the funds of the Court of Chancery, but he hoped the right hon. gentleman would not be tempted to force upon the suitors of the court these bonds which nobody else would accept. As for the threat which the right hon. gentleman had thrown out about paying off the Three per Cents. unless these bonds were taken in exchange, how was it to be done ? Where was the money to come from ? Well, then, if the holders of the Three per Cents. would remain quiet, they need I fear nothing, they were just as safe now as they were at any time before the Chancellor of the Exchequer made his threat, and he hoped they would remain contented with their situation. To come now to the subject immedi- i ately under consideration—he could see no objection what ever to the appointment of the committee. He did not in- 1 tend to discuss a bill which was not yet before the house ; but the noble earl at the head of the Government had told them that the measure ought t o b e passed—that there would 1 be no wavering about it, and that their lordships must pass it speedily. How, then, could this motion have come too ' soon ? If it had been delayed until the bill came up, it would have been met by an o bj ec ti on th e o th er way ; b ut I be that as it might, was th ere ever a measure t en d ere d 1 to Parliament which deserved more serious consideration than this? The plan of the Chancellor of the Exchequer ' embraced that of Sir Robert Peel in 1842, and the plan which Mr. Pitt proposed in 1796; but the Chancellor of the Exchequer seemed to have selected the worst features of each, and the question which their lordships would soon have to determine was whether a tax upon successions should be passed now for the first time. In 1796, when Mr. Pitt proposed the tax, there were seven di visions in the House of Commons upon it ; and upon every single division, the number in favour of the Ministry decreased, until, at last, on the third readin g , th e num b ers b e i ng equal, the bill was only carried by the casting vote of the Speaker. On the following day Mr. Pitt abandoned the measure, and the land tax, made perpetual, was sub stituted in its stead. (Hear, hear.) A third of that tax had been redeemed, and now the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed to give a sort of bribe for the redemption of the remaining two-thirds. But to come back to Mr. Pitt's plan for a tax upon successions, as he wo they e of Commons. me by descent, wanted to call the particular a tt en ti on o f th e i r l ordships to b p e v l a i.s n e w the difference betw een M r . Pitt' s measure and the one now b efore he h H e n u he y ca lar y d . Putt's rate compared with thi s one . M r. Pi tt only taxed real estates, vo luntary settlement. It did no t t ouc h lineal descent what ever, and therein lay the difference between Mr. Pitt's plan and the plan of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. Pitt began his tax with collaterals, while the highest amount of tax imposed on the succession was six per cent. Besides that, Mr. Pitt exempted all property from the tax which was acquired by a wife from a husband, and all property acquired by the husband from the wife, but this bill of the Chancellor of the Exchequer struck at the root of every settlement. It included the settlement of the highest con sideration known to the law, viz., a marriage settlement, and yet this was to be done in the time of profound peace, and in the face of the fact that Mr. Pitt would not attempt it at a period when he had the excuse of an expensive war to support him. But besides that, when Mr. Pitt proposed his tax on succession there was no land tax, but now both were to be perpetrated. Just observe what this bill would do. Every noble lord living under a settlement would be liable to the tax upon the death of some party or other, and the Government, wishing to catch at deaths which had already taken place, proposed that the bill should date back to the 19th of May. It was not only objectionable on that account, but it was objectionable on the ground that it taxed capital, which was opposed to all principles of sound policy. It was, in fact, a tax upon capital, and not upon income. Now, such a tax could only be justi fiable pin the case of an emergency, and when no other could be obtained ; but here there was no necessity for it whatever except that which the Chancellor of the Ex chequer created himself. In some instances the tax would positively amount to confiscation, for the tax would swallow the whole proceeds of the estate for the first two or threeyears after the succession, and the party succeeding to it would be left to no other resource for his subsistence by the Jew money lender---(a laugh)—although he might have been living comfortably out of the estate before the death of his parent or brother, as the case might be. (Hear, hear.) As regarded therefore money estates, which were already chargeable to existing settlements, it would be a postive confiscation ; and since the law would be not only an ex parte facto law, but ono which would press at the very moment when it could be the least endured, he hoped their lordships would pause before they sanctioned more especially as such a tax had never been proposed in this country before. (Hear, hear.) There was besides a great difference between the law that affected personal es tates and the law now proposed. At present the law stopped in to claim its dues in cases of intestacy and bequests, but in these cases the party succeeding to the personalty had never possessed it before, and he therefore did not feel so much the 101. that was deducted from every hundred ; but in the case of this bill the matter was entirely different, because under many settlements, although the actual suc cession had yet to take place, the money might yet bo said to be in hand. Then why should the party so in posses sion be required to pay this tax at a moment when perhaps he was weeping for the loss of his dearest relative. (Hear, Only consider the absurdity of their legislation. One day they were asked to enfranchise copyholds so that they should be relieved from paying fines upon the contingency of death, and now they are required to sanction a tax which would be felt far more severely at the very critical moment which it was desired to avoid in the other case. (Hear, hear.) Pass this tax as it stood, and it would be tantamount to effecting a mortgage upon every man's property, for a mortgage was nothing but a charge upon an estate, and this tax was precisely the same. (Hear, hear.) If ow was the tax to be raised, and by what t machinery was it to be collected ? A more odious tax could never have been devised. The tax-gather would • never be out of their lordships' houses, He would come THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 28, 185 3. after a death, and examine the settlements. Every man's settlement would be ransacked by a public officer in a public office. The officer must tall, on the death of any member of a family, to know the nature of the settlement. The inquisitorial nature of the income tax was nothing to that of the tax now proposed. The banker had his book to show when bills became due; the tax gatherer here would have his book to see when successions became due. Then all the property must be valued at a very great cost. (Hear, hear.) One of the most enormous establishments must be set up to carry on all these operations, with re ference to all the p ro p er t y i n th e ki ng d om. What would become of the sanctity of private life under such a bill? Time had perfected the mode by which a man could now enjoy property under settlement, but all that would be put an end to by the proposed measure. Look also at the number of offices which must be created, and the great patronage it would give to the Government. Again, was Ireland in a position in which they ought to impose such a tax on her ? Under the Encumbered Estates Act, numbers of estates had been sold, which the possessors and their an cestors had enjoyed before them. This bill would create a new mode of dealing with property in Ireland--and the proprietors, in many instances, would be obliged to sell their estates in consequence of this succession tax. The committee now asked for what they had a right to have ; and by the time the bill arrived in their lordship's house, it would have afforded them information which would satisfy the country and themselves as to the course they ought to adopt with reference to it. (Hear, hear.) The LORD CHANCELLOR said that his noble and learned friend having, with the authority which attached to his name, denounced the measure as inipolitice and preg nant with the grossest injustice, ho felt it incumbent on him to explain why he thought that charge to be utterly ground less, and to rest on no foundation whatever. Ho would first make a passing observation as to the motion : profess ing but little experience in their lordships' house, and agreeing that it was open to them to enter into the consider ation of any measures, whether they originated in the House of Commons or not, and that they were not bound blindly to register any measure that came from the other branch of the legislature, yet he did think the course now proposed to be pursued was as nearly without precedent as possible—namely, to appoint a committee of their lordships' house to inquire into the expediency of a tax now under discussion in the other house of Parliament. (Hear, hear.) There was another objection to the mode in which the motion was frame 1. The noble earl proposed to refer it to a select committee to inquire into its probable consequences. What was to be done by the committee ? The noble earl slurred that over by saying that they might have the benefit of examining conveyancers. Bet what could they tell them ? Everybody knew that settlements were made of real and personal estate, and that wills were made, and whether the measure was just or politic no conveyancer could say more than any other man. All the noble lords who had spoken had, as it were, their briefs before them. They were possessed of all the information that West minster-hall could supply on the subject. (Hear, hear.) For what purpose, then, was the inquiry to take place ? It was said that the report might influence the other house. He thought that, however, was a wild imagina tion ; but if that werq so, the noble earl would have gained his object by the discussion that night, because it was per fectly certain that no further information could be obtained than that which was already known. He would proceed to state why he thought the measure was just and prac ticable. The noble and learned lord who spoke last night, and those who preceded him, objected to it—first, because it included land in the legacy tax ; and next because it embraced not only successions coming on deaths derived from wills or intestates, but also successions corning from settlements. It was important to separate those two con siderations. (Hear, hear.) And first he would ask, was there any injustice, any inexpediency, in subjecting land to the legacy duty, in the same way as personal property ? Was it unjust when they were imposing a tax on one species of property to impose it on all ? (Hear, hear.) Why should it not be taxed? Prima facie, when they were imposing that which was a property tax, whatever name they might give it, whether it was land, tithes, money in the funds, stock in trade, or whatever it might be, justice presumed that they should tax it all as equally as might be. (Hear, hear.) But let them get rid of a legal difficulty which attached to all subjects of that kind. It was said to be unjust. Now, if it was meant that cases might be suggested in which there would be an in equality of burden, ho would concede it. Would they, however, tell him to which of their taxes that would not apply? Was it in the nature of things to have absolute justice as connected with any positive tax ? Nobody could pretend that the income tax was absolutely just. Every subject of taxation was liable to the same difficulty. They could only aim at arriving at the nearest approach to jus tice, and surely that would be to impose a property tax as equally as they could on property of all descriptions ; and the injustice would be the other way. (Hear, hear.) Refer ence had been made to Mr. Pitt's measure in 179 G. Now, he did not feel the necessity of fallinc , back on authority ; but it was nevertheless true that Mr. Pitt proposed to levy his legacy duty on reality as well as personalty, but he was obliged to yield to the opposition which was raised against it. And it was said that he substituted the land tax of 1798, making that tax perpetual. Why, the land tax was imposed by William 111., and was renewed every year. Everybody knew it was coming, and Mr. Pitt's sole object in making it perpetual was to give the option of redeeming it. It was a poor argument to fall back upon the land tax. It was called :land tax, and was a sort of local tax, each district being bound to raise a certain sum of money; and the consequence was, that in stead of its being now an equal tax, the inequalities were so absurd that in some parishes it was 2d. in the pound, whilst in others it was 2s. So that to refer tO the land tax as anything that ought to be followed seemed very absurd. But his noble and learned friend said that Mr. Pitt did not propose to tax children, True, he did not propose it in 1796, but he did at a later period, and it was clear what his views were on the subject if he could have carried them. But was that all? Feeling the injus tice of what he had been driven to in 1796, he endeavoured to get out of it in 1805, not, it was true, by putting a legacy duty on land, but, going as near to it as he could, he imposed a legacy tax upon all money that was charged upon land, and upon all estates that were devised to be sold, and ho made them pay the same as if they wore per sonal property. But then it was asked what was to be done in reference to a party succeeding to an estate heavily mortgaged ? And it was said, " You never could impose e t . hi3 s t e a n x o ' up W on hy . f a h r i g s e n po o7l i ta n s o l f i . a t t e b p ee r n op f e e r r ty a l o o f nt he ti co me nn in . try—the leasehold property was all subject to the tax. (Hear, hear.) All the property renewable—property held under cleans and chapters; and it applied to nearly all the house property in London—(hoar, hear)—as well as to is considerable number of properties that were originally mortgages for a long term of years, and had become abso lute. To such property the injustice if it were so, ap plied ; and it was an injustice to tax his leasehold house, whilst his neighbour's freehold house escaped the duty. (Hear, hear.) Thera was another injustice : the present 3 legacy duty was imposed on the absolute value of the pro- perty in leaseholds, but the present bill would set that right, the calculation being made upon the annual value. Having disposed of the first part of the subject, he thought it was equally clear that there would be no injustice in extending the legacy tax to what was called succession— that was, making parties pay the tax not only on property which came to them by the will of a party, but by settle ment. Why should it not be so ? His noble and learned friend and himself, as lawyers, looked at the matter very I differently from the way in which the country regarded it. The tax upon personal property, whilst real property was exempt, was felt to be an injustice ;• it was benefitting the richer classes by exempting them from a tax which fell on the poorer classes--(hear)—and that was the feeling which prevailed most extensively in the country. (Hear, hear.) There was no distinction in principle whether property was given by will or settlement. It was a property tax at the time the party succeeded to the inheritance ; whether it was by arrangement made by his parents in his lifetime or by will, ho saw no reason in principle why the tax should not be levied. (Hear, hear.) But it was com plained of that the bill would put this tax on personal estates succeeded to by settlement. That was true, and he thought it to be perfectly just. They should overlook the distinction as to how the succession arose, whether it came by one mode or another. The noble earl (Derby) re marked on the hardship of putting the tax on heir-looms ; but perhaps he was not aware of the law on that subject. There was no duty on heir-looms unless they came to a per son who was the absolute possessor and could turn them into money. He thought he had shown that it was not unjust to impose a legacy duty on land ; and it must be evident that its exemption from the tax could not be j us- tilled. There was another point to which he would for a moment refer. The noble earl who made the motion had referred to the hardship of persons succeeding one after another —as, for instance, it might happen that two or more brothers might succeed one after another, and the legacy duty might be payable several times. Now there was a clause in the bill which provided that where parties became entitled to property by succession instead of a le gacy, then before the duty was paid four years should elapse, so that if the possessor died within that time the , tax would be paid by his successor. Earl FITZWILLIAM admitted that it was right that land should no longer remain exempt from taxation to which personalty was liable, and that taxation should equally be applied to settled property. Some questions, however, had been put in the course of the debate to which he had heard no answer. He (Earl Fitzwilliam) had asked before whether any writer on political economy could be quoted in favour of a tax—(A noble lord : Mr. John Mill)—which operated, not gently and gradually, but sud denly and violently, Ho was sorry to differ from so emi nent an authority as Mr. Mill, but there must be some thing more than Mr. Mill's authority to justify the impo sition of this tax. Before consenting to such an impost, their lordships should consider that they were asked to tax persons who were not represented—that they were asked to tax, not themselves, but their successors, and successors generally. He confessed he was not a little surprised to hoar his noble friend at the head of the Government say that they had no business to interfere with this matter ; that, whatever the House of Commons had agreed to, their 1 lordships were bound to sanction. (Hear, hear.) He was sure it was not wise that the house should enter into any conflict with the other house of Parliament, and he begged also to say that it was not wise for the other house of Par liament to enter into a conflict with that house. (Hear.) It was most desirable that the proceedings of the two houses should harmonise with one another. The noble earl who introduced this motion had made a good selection of time, considering how lately the measure had been in troduced. They had been told of alleviations of the tax. Every one of those alleviations was a condemnation of the tax itself ; none would be needed in the case of a property tax. As regarded valuations, who would guarantee that the valuations in different parts of England would be con ducted on the same principle ? In whatever point of view this tax might be regarded, it would, he believed, be fraught with inconvenience; and he thought the other house of Parliament equally with that was indebted to the noble earl for having proposed this inquiry. He had very great doubts whether the tax could be levied ; but he trusted, nevertheless, that every member of their lordships' house would go into the inquiry with a determination to listen fairly to the witnesses on both sides. (Hear, hear.) His noble and learned friend (the Lord Chancellor) seemed to think that it was not necessary to make any inquiry ' • but he (Earl Fitzwilliam) would ask their lordships whether, before seeing the bill that morning, they had any distinct idea of its provisions? Ho should vote for the inquiry, on the ground that it would assist, not merely their lordships, but even the Government, in coming t o a soun d conclusion ' with regard to the merits or demerit s o f the proposition. The Duke of ARGYLE said th e no bl e earl who had just sat down would vote, it appeared, for the o totally different grounds f rom those which c ha ul d m b it e te en e p o u n t forward by a great number of noble lords dis tinctly assenting to the p r i nc i p l e of t bemea O s p u P r o e si i t n e so ; far that he was willing to extend t o rea l set tled personalty an additi ona l t ax. Theroperty and to noble mover said he did not introduce the question as a party one ; but it was impossible to deny that the motion was connected with those principles which were held by noble l or d s opposite in reference to the i nc id ence of taxation on real as opposed to personal property. The loudest cheer which had been heard in the course of the debate was elicited by the remark that the measure was prompted by a spirit of hostility to ) wards the land ; and the ground on which the motion had Now, if the measure came Co their lordships' house, - 9,13 un- questionably it would, even though a committee were appointed, he should feel it to be his duty to press the bill through their lordships' house. (Hear, hear.) But he trusted their lordships would not agree to the proposition of the noble earl. At all events, he, on the part of the Government, assured their lordships and the country that they had not the slightest intention of wavering or hesi tating an instant with regard to the wisdom, the justice, or th policy of this tax. (Cheers.) The Earl of DERBY said that he had no desire to enter on that occasion upon the subject which had been so ably brought before their lordships by his noble friend. But there were some observations of the noble earl opposite which he could not allow to pass without remark. The course pursued by the noble earl reminded him of what Lord Althorp, then a member of Earl Grey's Government, said on one occasion in reference to a measure then under discussion. When Lord Althorp was pressed on the sub ject he said he would abide by the decision of the Cabinet, that he knew good reasons for the measure, but he was unable to state them, and upon that he asked for the sup port of the House of Commons. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Whether their lordships had so much confidence in the noble earl as the noble lord demanded in the House of Commons, he did not know, but his speech was of the same kind, for the noble earl did not attempt to grapple with the manifest injustice and impracticability of the measure as exposed by his noble friend, but content ed himself by saying that the Government were satisfied of the justice of the measure, that they would not waver a single instant, that they would not allow inquiry or con sultation, but that it must be passed right or wrong. (Hear, hear.) The noble earl said that they might inquire if they pleased, but that he could not wait for the result of that inquiry, and that both houses of Parliament might blindly pass the measure. He (the Earl of Derby) hardly thought that this was the line of argument which a Prime Minister of England should adopt. (Hear, hear.) The noble earl said that this was a subject which pecu liarly belonged to the province of the House of Commons. But he (Lord Derby) had yet to learn that their lordships' house were bound to register the decrees of the House of peL C ar o orar m ledts : a o wo o n bek s lre , eh e obi v aro e u n n idn to financialcomply matters ,blindly theirt h the House requests,of be they right or wrong, be they just or unjust, be they rwahcteincahbele;aid(Hjueastr or r he u a n r iu ) st. Th ß e u noble e verythe proposition thing w o h i f h c t ei e d h t p heGye Government rnd wanted nin oetn.t ov wasen knowobj juste et,owasto whetherunjust, condemn otuntte t m h eny e prac ticable or impracticable. (Hear.) They (lid t us d proposition,the means of inquiring into the merits of desired to have the proposition. He trusted their lordships would consider it due to their o wn p os i t i on that they should consult and advise in the independent exercise of their concurrent r o gi t s h l e at t iv im e e au a t t h w ri ohtiych. th(elimeaortionT•whas made, but h The noble earl obje (theected Earl of Derby) did not k now w h ether he objected to it, because it was made too early or too late. The noble earl said that if this was a new L eg i s l ative proposition with which they were unfamiliar, there might be some reason for an inquiry. But, said the noble earl, this measure had been fully explained five or six weeks ago in the House of Commons, and the resolutions had been agreed to without been supported by several speakers was that of the abstract injustice of extending the succession tax to real property. (Hear, hear.) He held that it was utterly impossible for the house to judge fairly of the effect of the measure as regarded the landed interest unless they considered it in connexion with all those financial measures which formed part of the budget. He must ask their lordships to recol lect that after the late Government had acceded to office they threw overboard their favourite scheme of the trans ference of the local rates to the consolidated fund ' • and that, instead of getting rid of the income tax,`they actually proposed to renew it in an aggravated form as regarded the land. (Hear.) When the present Government came into power, they found it necessary to review the whole financial position of the country. It was requisite to determine, not only whether the income tax should be permanent or not, but whether some pledge should be given to Parliament as to the relinquishment of the income tax if it should be in the power of the Government at some future time. Let not noble lords opposite flatter themselves that if they had car ried their scheme they could have evaded the question of the legacy duty. The into Chancellor of the Exchequer, after proposing an alterat'en o" the income tax, which acted differentially as regarded land, and atter abandoning his proposition with regard to local rates, wound up his state ment by saying that the existing legacy duties constituted a mass of injustice which could not long remain unre formed. (Hear, hear.) After proposing a differential in come tax as e'gainst land— The Earl of DERBY—The proposition was not that there should be a differential duty as against land, but that a difference should be made between permanent and precarious incomes. The Duke of ARGYLL—WeII, then, there was to be a differential duty as aga i nst realised property, of which land formed a great part. If any change had taken place in the legacy duties, it would evidently h The have been a change in the was p th re el p . oesaealt.roef key -stone thedirection now proposed. Go vernment on that subject which all the other propositionsiccYl—us4 whole arch of their financial ro w t a L s tHhaet had d u e n o d hesitation in saying that the differential income tale as have exceeded in wa a s m t ount the proposed against land w ou ld have bee o n b a e remembered motion,d d w e h d a . a there imposition of l egacy d u t y, and it that this legacy d u ty m i g ht th en Their lordship s th en di v id e d f or the appeared— Contents—Present Proxies Non•Contents—Present 73 Proxies 66-139 Majority against the motion l3 The other orders were disposed of, and the house ad ourned at a quarter to eleven. HOUSE OF COMMONS--(YESTERDAY.) The Speaker took the chair at four o'clock. DURHAM ELECTION. On the question that the members chosen to serve on the Durham Election Committee be called to the table to be sworn, _ _ Mr. T. EGERTON moved that the committee be discharged and the petition referred again to the General Committee of Elections, on the ground that one of the members selected to serve on the Durham committee, viz., the hon. member for Dundee, was now sitting on a committee on certain private bills. The SPEAKER suggested that the motion should be made in the terms prescribed by the petition, viz., that the hon. member for Dundee be alone discharged, and then, as a matter of course, the committee would be re ferred back to the general committee of elections. Mr. T. EGERTON said he had no objection to amend the motion accordingly. Sir J. TROLLOPE had no wish to oppose the motion, but he must protest against it being treated as a pre cedent. Mr. ELLICE announced that other motions of this nature would have to be made hereafter. After a short conversation, Mr. DUNCAN said that the motion had been made out of no personal regard for himself, but solely for the sake of promoting the business of another committee upon which he had been sitting for some considerable time. He was quite ready to abide by the decision of the house, but he wished it to be distinctly understood that he had no desire whatever to shirk his duties. The motion was then agreed to. CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS. The members selected to serve on the Clare, Liver pool, Sligo, and Peterborough Election Committees were called to the table and sworn. The committees to meet for the first time to-morrow. BURY ST. EDMUNDS. On the members selected to serve on this committee being called over, Mr. STRUTT moved that the attendance of the hon. member for Tewkesbury on the committee be dispensed with on the ground that the hon. member was already serving on a committee where his attendance could not be dispensed with. The motion was agreed to. BLACKBURN ELECTION. The SPEAKER informed the house that he had re ceived a letter in this case, stating that it was not in tended to go on with the petition. PRIVATE BILLS. The following private bills were read a third time and passed :—Caledonian Railway (Connecting Branch with Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway, &c.) ; North and. South Western Junction Railway (Hammersmith) ; Sunderland Dock ; Victoria (London) Docks ; South Eastern Railway (Reading Extension, &c.) PETITIONS. Mr. G. PALMER presented a..._ petition from the borough of Preston, against the bill for the registration of :assuran ces. (Sir E. FILMER presented a petition from Maid stone, praying for the total repeal of the hop duty. Mr. .11f U.NTZ presented a petition from Birmingham, praying that the elective franchise might be extended to the London University. Mr. BROWN presented a petition from 32 prisoners confined in the Preston gaol, praying the house to take steps to prevent the demoralising effects of unlicensed beer-houses. Mr. WHALLEY presented a petition from Peter borough, praying the house to legalise marriage with a deceased wife's sister. Mr. SPOONER presented a petition from the attor neys and solicitors of Birmingham, against the Regis tration of Assurances Bill. Mr. TURNER presented a peition from a place in the north against the opening of the Crystal Palace on Sundays. Mr. M. MILNES presented a petition from a book seller, praying that foreign books might be admitted duty free. Mr. M. GIBSON presented a similar petition from Manchester. Mr. DUFFY presented a petition from New Ross, maying that the income tax might not be extended to reland. DOCKYARD PROMOTIONS. Mr. KEATING gave notice that, when the evidence taken before the Dockyard Committee on the subject of dockyard promotions had been fully considered by honourable members, he should call the attention of the house to it, and submit a motion upon it. The case of Lieutenant Ingledue was referred to the same com mittee, and as it had not yet been reported upon, he was not able to state the precise terms of his mo tion, but this he could state, that he should frame it not in reference to the conduct of particular indi viduals, but make it general as regarded the proceedings of the late Board of Admiralty in relation to the matters referred to the committee. EDUCATION BILL. Mr. E. HINDLEY gave notice that on Monday he should ask the noble lord at the head of the Government whether he thought it would be possible, considering the advanced period of the session, to get through his educational scheme. ISLE OF MAN. Mr. EWART wished to know when the bill for alter ing the Customs Duties of the Isle of Man was likely t o be sent out to the island ? Mr. WILSON thought it would be ready in the early part of next week. CUSTOMS ACTS. In reply to questions from Mr. W. Bitowx, Mr. WILSON said the bill for consolidating the whole of the customs acts was in a forward state of preparation, and he hoped to be able to lay it on the table in the course of a fortnight. IRISH DRAINAGE COMMISSION. In reply to questions from Col. DUNNE, Mr. WILSON ,said the report of the Irish drainage commissioners was now ready, and would be laid on the table neat week. THE AFFAIRS OF THE PORTE.—THE HOLY PLACES. ------ On the motion that the house at ;its rising do adjourn to Monday next, Mr. DISRAELI rose and said—l am 'most unwilling to take advantage of this motion at any aloe for the purpose of entering into a general discussion upon any subject, and nothing but a sense of public duty would induce me now to take this opportunity of adverting to the topic to which I am about to refer. In doing so, I will endeavour to confine myself as much as possible to an inquiry of her Majesty's Government, making one or two remarks merely in order to bringth t e he su o bj t e to ct in t a o n. their attention, and the attention of the house. That subject is, the state of our relations with Porte. The house will recollect, that early in the spring of the present year, considerable alarm w as created, not tohnelyariiiiivthalisocfoaunnterxyt,rbaourtdiinnaortyheerrabswtaasatseys I.oofinE R ur u o s Pe sia% b a y t was states in Some d egree a a rm ration a C l o l a n y s e t a d n , t b i n y o theple — e o b n u fi t d e t n h t a td declaration though apparently com mence d with circumstances of great pomp and urgency, did no t persons in au thority, that this missi on , after all refer to any subject of general interest and im portance, but merely had reference to the relations which re be t t h w e een ought Church,to subsist wim w e the members of the Greek holy places at Jerusalem.subjects of the Porte, and the sion which obtainedlcurrncljy,n t d h e e r p th u a b t lie ge m n i e n r d al as ii s n u p ra r e e d s; I think I may say, happened about sixaspectof tranquillity. But it so weeks . ago or a little more, that Col. a time, in the absence of Lord Strat ford, our ambassador, the British Minister at Constanti nople—agentleman have been in any way placed in connection with him will bear witness, that he is a man of great ability sessing considerable knowledge of the country in which he has been placed, in a very responsible p os ition s it is happened that about the period I have stated, Colonel Rose suddenly felt it his duty to telegraph to the British Admiral at Malta, requesting the immediate presence of the British fleet at the Dardanelles, it being at the same time announced that the French ambassador at Constan. tinople had despatc h ed a message to the French squad ron at Toni" •requesting its immediate presence in the same locality. These circumstances immediately revived i the alarm that had previously been so prevalent, but ~'