The Sun. — London, England, 1857-02-21 00:00:00

charge their duties as faithful stewards of the peopl e ? Th e n, if they were, they could n ot shut their eyes, or rush blindly oy Ex r c e h al e l ci y u s e t r oo s c a l id h H e is w r o ig u h la t n o , n .wfirtiheonudt the seeing Chancellor ho w the neither affirm nor deny the resolution of the right h on . gentle man opposite, but would only say he thought th a t resolution o c f ou th nt e r uncalled for and unnecessary. The word " deficiency" had evidently a disagreeable effect on the house. They had been for a number of years accustomed to a surplus, and he (Mr. Gladstone) had begun to hope that the word " deficiency" had passed from their vocabulary as well as from their recollection. The right hon. gentleman deprecated the form in which the right hon. gentleman put his resolution. He said he could not understand the meaning of the phrase " adjusting the income and expenditure." He said there could be no adjust ment in a committee of supply or in a committee of ways and means, and that as for a select committee it would be useless, for its labours would not terminate until the end of the session. Why, those words, adjustment of income and expenditure, would seem, from the observations of the right hon. gentleman, to be written in a foreign language, though, if they were, he would probably understand them a great deal better—(alaugh) —but he (Mr. Gladstone) yet hoped that the significance of those words, in the genuine mother tongue, would be yet fully impressed on the mind of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman opposite invited them to take measures that, at all events, there should be no deficiency that the country should, like an honest man, pay its debts —cut its cloth according to its measure. Did the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer threaten them with a deficiency or did he not ? He had met them with au answer. But what sort of answer was it ? His right hon. friend on Friday night said something about the balance in future years —an answer which in effect gave but little encouragement to the House of Commons. He said his right hon. friend who had asked the house to vote away the taxes of that year could not possibly escape—he would fain say should not escape -from the obligation of holding out a reasonable prospect that we should have it in our power to balance income with expenditure. Again, he would refer to those proceedings which were originally his own, yet, as they had received the sanction of the Government and of Parlia ment, had now become matters of record. When, in the year 1853, we entered on a course of prospective finances—when the Government sketch d the course of our finance onwards to the year 1860, they did not shelter—they would not have been permitted to shelter—themselves under such doctrines as had been set up that night by his right hon. friend. His right hon. friend said he could estimate the receipts of future years, but be could not estimate the expenditure. Did he think he would advance his character as a financial minister by the adoption of such a maxim? (A laugh.) Again, ho said he could estimate the revenues of future years, Could he estimate the consumption of commodities by a growing popu lation—the consumption of tea and sugar in future years? He (Mr. Gladstone) did not know. Those gentlemen who had been Chancellors of the Exchequer had had very sad experi ence of the task of estimating the quantity of commodities which would be consumed in future years by the population. Why, if it came to that, he would say that he could not esti mate the receipts of future years, tor,' they could only do that by asseming the contingencies of ordinary years as their guide for what would happen in years to come. (Cries of " Well, well," behind Ministers.) You can ? Why, then, by the same method they might estimate the expenditure of fu ture years. (Opposition cheers.) Yet his right hon. friend said he could estimate the receipts of future years, but he could not estimate the expenditure. It did appear to him when his right hon. friend stood up in his place and made that statement, that he was trifling with the house, and using them like children. (" Oh, oh," from behind Ministers; and loud Opposition cheers.) That, he frankly owned, was his opinion. (Hear, hear.) What, sir, not estimate the ex penditure ! Not within many millions ! whether it would be fifty millions or five, (" Oh, oh," from behind Ministers.) You can, then, estimate whether it would be fifty millions or five. He begged them to be patient, for they would find he was not speaking without good reason. It might be seen that the course of observation had been established by ex perience just as much in regard to expenditure as in regard to the revenue of this country; and the expenditure of the country, apart from the contingencies of war, did not fluctu ate more than, not so much, as the revenue. What, then, did his right hon. friend ? He set down the expenditure of the present year as amounting to 65,500,000/. ; he then made an allegation that there would be a deficiency of 5 ,000,000/. in the year 1858-9 ; he took the receipts of the year 1857-8, and then compared the expenditure of the following year 1858-9 with the expenditure of the year 1853, which was 6,000,000/. less than this present year. (Hear, hear,) Now, what had the right h on. gentleman shown that would justify him in that course ? Take it for what it was worth. Still the house had a right to know what was the value that at tached to these figures, He would say they were a pure and perfect delusion. He asked him whether he or any Minister of the Government cou ld compare the expenditure of .1858-9 with the expenditure of 1853 ? Did he honestly believe that the expenditure of 1858-9 would be that of 1853 ? Did he believe that ? No, the house might wait long for an answer. He did not believe it; and, if they allowed the statement made by his right hon. friend to go forth to the country, they were practising a delusion on the country. Why, there was a sum of 1,760,0001. which had been added to the mis cellaneoas estimates and services of the country since 1853. His right hon, friend knew that the great bulk of that was in the shape of a permanent charge, and that what of it was in the shape of temporary charges would in all probability be succeeded by other temporary charges to at least a like amount. Every year the expendi ture had been rapidly increasing. Did his right hon. friend wish them to believe that it would be reduced by the amount of 1,760,0001 iu 1858-9 ? If his right hon, friend saw his way to that, then ho was not so trifling with the house, but if he knew, as he (Mr. Gladstone) had said, that the great bulk of that was in the shape of a permanent charge, and that ex penditure was steadily increasing, then he said his right lion, frie , ,d was trifling with the house. Again, if the sum of 1,760 000/. could be dispensed with in the year 1858-9, he wanted to know why it could not also be dispensed with in the year 1857-8 ? He did not ask hisright hon. friend to refer the miscellaneous estimates to a select committee ; he knew too well what that would come to. lie would not seek to transfer to other shoulders duties undertaken by the Govern ment, and which they were not able adequately to perform, but ho wished to send them back to the Government, that they alight try their hand on them again, and if they failed, then others might come to their relief. What he asked was, whether his right hon. friend really believed there would be a reduction of 1 ,760,0001.? He (Mr. Gladstone) believed there were not two opinions on the subject on either side of the house. The reference to the expenditure of 1853 was purely illusive. The house had nothing to do with the expenditure of 1853. He wished they bad. But he believed that the house, by vigilance and firmness, might produce an impression on the expenditure. Bat he was not so sanguine as to believe that they were going back to the expenditure of 1853. Ho believed that, looking at the wants of the country, it was more likely there would be an increase in 1858-9 on the ex penditure as compared with that of 1857-8. He was not going to state his reasons for that opinion For the militia he found 400,000/. put down—a sum which, he must say, was much below the average charge; but he believed that would be much below the charge for future years. He found no fault with the Government for the lowness of that charge. The militia was embodied during the war, and he thought it quite rational that the charge should be low the year after the war ; but he believed it would be increased for future years. The Persian war appeared for the sum of, 260,0001. Beyond that they only knew this, that they were at the commencement of that war. We had already one ex pensive expedition in the Persian Gulf; another expedition was ready to start for India; if he was not misinformed, we were at present sending out expensive stores to that coun try ; and we had another expensive expedition approaching Persia through Aff g h au i s t an. He remembered the Chinese war, that it was at first put down at 150,0Q0/. The cost of that war was recovered from China ; ho hoped that the cost of this war might be recovered from the enemy. But this he remembered, that the cost of that Chinese war amounted to several millions before it came to a c'ose. Of China now the house had heard nothing. They knew that they were at war in that quarter, that destructive services were going on, and that the G overnment were sending out men. But his right hon friend said he was still pressed with the war con tracts. Ho would ask him how he stood for stores and ma terials He knew that every department was bursting with stores and materials, and the Government knew not where to lay out money. But then we were going on with a war, and the expenditure on that head would increase. As to the coastguard the figures a ere not very clear ; but, as far as he could understand them, there had been an increase of from 70,0001. to 80,000/, compared with what had been the usual cost. But, then, the First Lord of the Admiralty stated that the expense of that service would only come on gradu ally, that at first it would be light, and that at last there would be a considerable increase. There, then, it seemed they had another source of increased expenditure. His right hon. friend rather estimated the receipts for future years under the head of miscellaneous receipts at an extraor dinary amount. The average amount from that sour, in the years ending with 1854 was 790,000/., but his right hon. friend took them at 1,200.000/. for the present year, and 1,400,000/. for the year following. How that would happen he did not know. He rather feared a decline iu these receipts next year as compared with the receipts of this year. He wished the house to take into consideration that the miscellaneous estimates were in a course of rapid growth, notwithstanding all the transfers which had been made from that head to others ; for, in the memory of many who were now present, they had increased from 2,000,0001. to 6,003,000/. Since the year 1853, notwithstanding what had been transferred to other heads, they bad increased a sum of 1,750,000/. What probability, then, was there of a diminu tion for future years ? That increase is due, I fear, partly to the extravagance of the house ; but it was due, also, to the necessity of meeting the advancing demands of society, and the house might now look for a steady increase. If they were to look at that matter honestly, let them take it as a matter of account, and bring the receipts and expenditure into a state of adjustment; and then, looking at the increasing wants of the public, whether, with the extravagance of the house, they were not more likely to entail an increase than a diminution • of expenditure. He would grant there were some sma ll ser . vices on which there might be a gain. He b e li eve d th a t i n the military department there were some small heaxls of ex pense where, without any vigorous attempts at diminution, they might expect to attain to it. He was not disputing th a t they must expect to see an increase upon expenditure ; yet he must say that, although expenditure had increased before, it had greatly increased of late years from that kind of legislation which, he would not say threw contempt on the house, but sue if I misconstrue the words—that we are to adjust the estimated income and expenditure of the years 1838-9 and 1859-60 in the manner which shall appear best calculated to secure the country against the risk of a deficiency in those years. I will assume that that is the meaning of his reso lution. Mr. DISRAELI—I beg to say that that is not its meaning. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Perhaps the right hon. gentleman will explain what he dons mean ? Mr. DISRAELI— I thought the wording of the reso lution was extremely clear, When I ask the house to resolve that it would be expedient, before sanctioning the financial arrangements for the ensuing year, to adjust the estimated income and expenditure, I do not refer to the estimated income and expenditure of the years 18584 and 1859-60, but allude particularly to the estimated income and expenditure of the present year. • The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Then what the right hon. gentleman proposes i., that we should adjust the estimated income and expenditure of the pre sent year in such a manner as should appear best calcu lated to secure the country against the risk of a deficiency in the two following years. I confess I had some difficulty as to the construction of the terms of his resolution, but I was rather desirous of saving his logic at the expense of his grammar. The right hon. gentleman, on the other hand, appears to wish to sacrifice his logic and save his grammar ; for by what process of adjustment of the income and expenditure of the current year we are to guard the country against the risk of a deficiency in the two follow ing years lamat a loss to imagine. The right hon. gen tleman is perfectly aware—he stated, indeed, in the course of his speech—that by lew the commissioners of the national debt are hound to apply to the reduction of the debt the surplus of each separate year; and therefore if there were a sureAus in the present yell- it could not be handed over te, supply the deficiency of subsequent years, but must be exhausted within the current year. But, assuming an adjustment of the estimated income and ex pentlit-are of the ensuing year to be expedient, how is it to be, carried out? Ido not think that a discussion such as that of to-night is likely to have a ver. adjusting effect. (A laugh.) The house itself cannot undertake the ad justment of the income and expenditure, and if that duty is to be performed in a workmen-like and. efficient manner the right honourable gentleman must .move the appoint ment of a select committee. There must be an ad j ustineet committee." I presume the first step would be to refer the army and navy estimates ; the civil service estieaeiess would follow, and so the process of ad justment IliPl-p . roceed through all the items of income and expen ks. Judging from the progress which for mer coneinittees have made with similar inquiries, I think I might venture to predict with considerable confidence that the report of the adjustment committee would not be presented much before the end of the session. The last committee upon the estimates sat two or three sessions; but, living the new committee credit for extraordinary dlligence, industry, and research, I think we could hardly 'expect their report before the end of the session. Even then, however, the process of adjustment would not be completed, because the house itself would have to consider and, if possible, agree to the report, and all this before the financial arrangements for the ensuing year are sane- Honed. Meanwhile, what would happen to the income tax? By law the war income tax is continued for another year. Unless some Act of Parliament to the contrary be passed by the Legislature before the Ist of April next, the collection of the tax must continue. Well, then, while the right hon. gentleman's committee was adjusting taxa tion the taxpayer would be paying his war ninepence up to the end of the present session, and thus the process which i s suggested for the relief of! the taxpayer would be Bound a principal means of aggravating the burden of the taxpayer. I trust then that, upon a consideration of ihis resolution and of the effect it would have as regards either the adjustment of income and expenditure or the question of the extinction of the income tax, the house will see that no practical benefit can result from its adoption, and that it will agree to the motion which I had the honour of mak ing that the Speaker do leave the chair, and that we enter at once upon a consideration of the resolutions relating to the income tax and the tea and sugar duties, and that we commence at once a revision of the taxation of the country in reference to its altered position by a transition from war to peace. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentl eman h av i ng resumed his seat, a sliglat pause ensued, during which cries of " Divide !" and " Question !" w ere h eard. rhe SPEAKER having read the resolution, Mr. GLADSTONE rose and said—Sir, I have been under the belief that the question raised by the budget of her Ma jesty's Government would excite very great interest in this house. lam still impressed with that belief, but perhaps the reluctance of hon. members to address the house may be in. tended to convey to me that they have a right to hear my sentiments upon this question. There is no man in this house who is so deeply concerned in the question which is now raised as myself. I have stood at that table and have addressed the House of Commons, and I have received, on the part of the Government to which I belonged, the assent of the House of Commons to financial plans which are in every point contradictory to those which are now proposed. (Hear.) How is it that hon. gentlemen still sitting on those (the Treasury) benches find a facility for giving assent to contradictory pro positions it is not for me to say, but of this I feel convinced, that if I may assume to exist in the House of Commons the same feelings which existed four years ago—l do not mean as to questions which were the subject of party contentions, but as to the duty of balancing income and expenditure—if we respect the express pledges which were given to the country on the subject of the income tax—if this house which I now address be the same house which then accepted the proposi tions of the Government when we held out certain expecta tions to the people of England, when with those expectations we imposed the income tax upon the people of Ireland, when We obtained an opportunity for the settlement of many diffi cult and thorny questions on account of the expectations so held out—(hear)—if this be the same House of Commons still governed by the same motives, still sensible of the same obli gations, then !I feel a great confidence in the vote which this house will give upon the present occasion. (Hear.) Ify right hon. friend who has just sat down has, I am bound to say, in the speech he has delivered, entirely, candidly, ingenuously corresponded with the description I have given of his financial plan. Everything for which we have been labour ing during the last fifteen years is, I do not say destroyed, because the destruction of the results of 15 years' labour is not the work of a single day—but everything in regard to finance for which we have been labouring during the last 15 years is in principle condemned alike by the speech as by the plans of the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Why, sir, for several years before 1841 it was the misfortune of this country that there arose a series of defi ciencies in the revenue. We recollect what it cost us to re pair those deficiencies. We thought that from that time the principle had been established that it was the first duty of the House of Commons to provide a revenue adequate to meet the demands of the public service. (Hear, hear.) ;We will see, by and by, what are the views of my right hon. friend upon the subject of the balance of income and expenditure. We thought we had been simplifying and consolidating our finan cial laws. Upon three separate occasions—in 1842, again in 1845, and in 1853—with the general assent of Parliament-- for it was no party question —great efforts have been made by successive Governments to cousolidate our financial laws, and we removed from our customs' tariff more hundreds of articles than I dare venture to mention. By that means we set a great portion of our trade entirely free, which I believe has been the main cause of its subsequent vast expansion. (Hear, hear.) But what stys the Chancellor of the Exchequer ? Does he approve that simplification ? No ; but he has done ties—he has disinterre told Arthur Young—(a laugh)—he ha s brought Arthur Young before us, and Arthur Young says that to load an infinity of articles with taxes infinitely small is the perfection of finance. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) That, how ever, is a total condemnation of thelabours of Parliament durin g he last 15 years. (Hear, hear.) In 1853 this house gave its solemn assent to this principle —that the income tax, while it continued at all, should be continued for opecial purposes— (hear, hear)—namely, for th e purpose of introducing great improvements into our financial system—of re lieving the mass of the people from heavy burdens. Therefore, although the tax in itself was grievous, inquisi torial, unequal, a tax which it was desirable to get rid of, yet Parliament agreed to t o l erate it for a further time, but onl for that one purpose—(hear)—which mitigated the recol lection of the hard s hip o f the tax by associating with it a re collection still more pu ngent of the blessings to be wrought out for the mass of the people through its instrumentality (Hear, hear.) What has be come of that principle in the hands of the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Ex chequer ? With what beneficial change does he propose to associate the coutinuance of the income tax? (Hear.) m y right hon, friend has not avoided the subject. His candour and ingenuousness forbade him to avoid it. He scorned to escape it—he discussed the subject of indirect taxation —h e knew there were three matters respecting which much feeling prevails in the country as to the expediency of the existing law. The right hon. gentleman knew there was the tax on Raper, which it is urged is not only a heavy burden upon literature, not only a burden upon the manufacturers, but a restraint upon the extension of rural labour, to which the manufacture is so well adapted, (Hear, hear.) He took the tax upon insurances, which is a scandal to England. (Hear.) lie took alsu the tax on wine, which he knows to be the greatest impediment to our enlarged intercourse with France ; and hoW did the right hon. gentleman deal with those sub je_t,i flow does he p ropose t o associate the continuance of the "(Ana tax with the iecol'ection of a benefit conferred ? Ho said that the duty on paper was not a bad duty, that the tax uPon'insurances was a good one, and as to the duties on wine he would discuss them another day. (" Hear, hear," and a laugh. ) ask, then, whether I use the language of exaggeration, or the] right honourable frienar4go of truth, when I state that my he completely in his speech thrown overboard, condemned, repudiated as far as the act of one year can go—principles osft finance which were intro. diced amid difficultie s end extensively applied when the generllarty niggles, which were first opposite was iu power, and applied with the asrperoval of that party, as well as of the party os thriigs sae the f house. With respect to all those things my ht f riend —I will not hapraevet:ascechrist,anfodr as yet say destroys all the benefits which he has only had one opportunity to he • has done pretty well, and I am certain that if the Cha!nbeeultl who may succeed him should follow his ex ample, or the Exchequer ample, or if he himself continue:3,4x labour inalis vocat* as he promises to do i this, loa sedulously in future yea as those labours should obtain the sanction of the IluousfaCnot t ru if . mons, at the cud of the next 15 years you evil]. find but f ew relics of the great efforts and gi eel achievements of th e last 15 • years. (Hear.) To pass from the speech to the B udget I am sorr i o find that, owing to what circumstances th cannot tell, it ' 'urlifilaide the means of propagating ioughout the mild axl p i xies of impressions as to matters of fact which are tottainn )unded f lam quite sure it 'was not the inten tieu Of the bou gentleman to produce any such effect, but I am quiteas certain th a t suc h e ff ec t s have been produced, -,and that t he'production - of them is owing to the inadvertent • use he has made of sion in the count ry fig lee ures in his st a tement. The impres s. that the Chancellor of the Ex chequer had tak en 0ff11,970"/ . of taxes, slim 9,120,000/. was on,' account of income tax, leavi,g and that of this a eurplus of 980,000/Oat that the right - hon. gentleman had held out no hopeincome tax would be taken off in 1850. He believed that this was the exact impression which the right hon. gentleman's explanation of the budget had pro pagated. The country believed that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was about to repeal 11,900,0001. of taxes, and that be would still leave a surplus of 980,000/. If this foun d ttion were cut away from the right hon. gentleman, the whole merits of his plans were cut away with i t Bet this large remission of 11,970,000 did not depend upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer or upon the House of Commons, hat sum consisted of taxes which were granted for the par. poses of war and for the tine of th) war. The taxes upon property and income, tea, coffee, and sugar, would lapse by Act of Parliament. These taxes, making 4,470,0001., were dependent upon Acts of Parliament, the repeal of which was net due to the grace and favour of the Parliament of this session, but which expired by virtue of the construction of the Acts of Parliament under which they were levied. This 'sum of 4,470,000/. made a considerable hole in the right hon. gentleman's remission of 11,970,0001. It was believed by the country and by the House of Commons that the Chan cellor of the Exchequer was going to grant a remission of 9,000,000. of income tax applicable to the year 1857-58, and that there would be a surplus of 900,0001. The house had heard a good deal of criticism, if not cavil, that night from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, upon the practicability of balancing Income and expenditure, It was certainly a con venient course to leave future years to destitution, and, When called for an account, to say that it was impossible to balance income and expenditure. He contended that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was going to give away 4,600,000/. of income tax for the year 1857-58. The gift for 1858 59 would be 9,120,000/., and it was on the score of that liberality in respect of 1858-59 that the right honourable gentleman would now be called to account. (Hear, hear) The right honourable gentleman proposed to remit half the ninepenny income tax for the present year, and the whole ninepence in th e nex t y ear , b u t i n f a ct deducting 1 ,460,0001. on account of tea and sugar, he would really only remit 3,184,000/. The total amount of remission which they would therefore enjoy under the plan of the Government would be 7,654,0001., and the total amount of remission it invited this house to enact, and which would take effect partly in this year and partly in the next, would be 7,224,000/. ; but the total remission to be enjoyed in 1857-58 was 3,184,000/. Under these circumstances ho (Mr. Gladstone) thought he was justified in the statements he had made, that a most exten sive misapprehension of the facts had gone abroad throughout the country. If it were true that we were about to surrender 9,000,0001. of income tax, and if it were also true that while they made this surrender for their own benefit, they were going to keep their hands off from the tea and sugar of the poor, he ventured to say the opposition to the budget of the Government would have been of a very light and airy charac ter. (Hear.) But he would not admit the surplus of 900,0001 , whieh had been referred to by his right hon. friend, when he recollected that they had two wars proceeding in the East, and that the right lion. gentleman (the Chancellor of the Ex chequer) had not yet called upon the house to vote, nor told them what they would have to vote to the extent of one farthing for the China war either in 1857 or 1858, while in respect to the Persian war his right hon. friend confined himself to the con venient course of keeping, at least, a year in arrear of the charge. (Hear.) If the House of Commons had any regard for its constitutional duties it would never allow the Persian war to be conducted en such a principle. (Hear.) He, for one, gave notice that he did not understand it to be his func tion, as a representative of the English people, to come there and allow wars to be begun and carried on by the Govern ment while the discussion of such wars was to be escaped by no estimate of their charge was to be sub mitted until they were brought to a close. (Hear, hear.) But if hon members were not to conform to such an estimate of their duties, it was plain they would have to invite or to urge, or, if that had not the required effect, to endeavour to coerce the Government into submitting an estimate of the probable charges of the Persian war, so that they might exa mine them before the fact, and not after it. That being the case, so far from thinking that 900,000/, surplus was a sum immodest for the right hon. gentleman to ask, he (Mr. Glad stone) thought it was au extremely narrow sum for the pur pose ; but he could not regard it as a surplus bona fide fa-. vourable. He saw plainly they had two wars going on, and that it was incumbent on them to assume the whole charge of one and the half of the other. He, therefore, contended that 11,930,000/, of taxes were not repealed, that 9,000,0001. income tax were not remitted by the proposals of the right hon. gentleman—(hear) --and that a surplus of 900,0001, did not remain under them. So much for the description of the budget of the Government, and of the remissions it proposed to effect. The right hon. gentleman the member for Buck inghamshire spoke of the difficulties attendant upon pro spective finance, and no doubt they were serious. With regard, however, to his (Mr. Gladstone's) plan of 1853, he felt it was justified and required by the circumstances wader which it was proposed. At any rate, as it was proposed by the Government and accepted by Parlia ment ; and especially as it was accepted by the very Par liament 'in which they were now discussing the budget of 1857 it was a great deal too late to say they had no means of estimating the expenditure of the future. His right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not in the Parlia ment of 1853, and probably in his remarks he did not consi der the severity of the censure he was bestowing upon his colleagues ; he did not recollect that in 1853 the Government did pretend to form an estimate of the revenue of future years. (Hear, hear.) What they ought to do was to inquire whether the proceedings of the Government were reasonable; and if reasonable, they were bound to abide by them, or to show why and how far they were justified in departing from them. One word with regard to what followed the proceed. ings of 1853. Had he (Mr. Gladstone) been capable, for the sake of some temporary advantage, of coining down to the house and making demands at the cost of future years, he should have been the v er i es t c h ar l a t an an d th e b asest swindler who ever stood at the table, for ho thought there was no more solemn obligation than that under which a Finance Minister stood to the people of England. (Hear, hear.) So far as experience had thrown a light upon his plans, there was every reason to believe that the expectations held out would have been more than realised. In April, 1853, a probable surplus over the expenditure was shown, amounting to about 500,000/., and at the close of that year there was a surplus of 3,000,000/. In contemplating the expenditure of 1854 he (Mr. Gladstone) was able to say that had it not been for the war the Government would have confidently calculated upon a surplus of nearly 2,000,000/. ; and he had no reason to doubt, as far as the ordinary circumstances of the country would have influenced the revenue and ex ; enditure, that the expectations held out would have been fully realised, (Hear, hear.) The duty of the house was to inquire can didly and dispassionately into the intervening circumstances --as to the amount of difficulty which they had laid upon the Government—and then to consider whether that diffi culty was or was not sufficient to absolve them from the pledge they had given to the people of England. (Hear, hear.) He contended that the circumstances which had inter vened would not suffice to absolve them from their pledges, (Hear, hear.) His right hon. friend stated an item, as it ap peared to him (Mr. Gladstone), rather inaccurately; for he said they had not only incurred a new charge for debt, but had likewise abandoned a good deal of revenue since 1853. The right hon. gentleman gave the sum of 760,0001. taxation abandoned since that year, which he afterwards, on sugges tion, reduced to 475,0001., but still contended they were worsened since 1853, not only by the debt created, but by 475,000/. permanent debt. Ho must say that he reversed the statement of his right lion, friend, who appeared altoge ther to have forgotten the spirit dues. (Hear, hear.) The right lion, gentleman himself told them the spirit dues brought in 1,500,0001. a-year. Out of that sum 460,0001. was levied ia 1853, and the consequence was that 1,640,0001. of new re venue had been created since. Therefore, deducting the sum abandoned, he found an absolute balance in excess of the permanent revenue imposed, since 1853, of about 600,0001. a-year, and that applied to the additional charge left the real increase of the permanent burden at 650,0001. a-year. That alteration was brought about since 1853, and it repre sented what might he called the permanent financial loss of the country in consequence of taxing and borrowing in con nection with the war. He thought it must be plain to the house that it was not an item of such magnitude as wenn en able them to escape from the promises they had given and the expectations they had held out to the people in 1853, and by which promises and expectations they had raised their own political credit and prosperity at the moment, and like wise added to the stability of the finances of the country during the war, (Hear, hear.) As the p erson upon whom, more than upon a n y other, the weight of the promises given in that year might b.) said to rest, he (Mr. Gladstone) must say that the charges incurred did not, in his opinion, absolve him in honour or in conscience from the duty of straining every nerve still to maintain these promises, and fulfil them to the satisfaction of the people, He now came to the question *inflected with the essential merits of the budget. In his opinion there were in the beget four fatal flaws flaws and faults which ho felt bound to say nothing could induce him to tolerate. That objection was based upon the existing expenditure, lie subscribed to what had been said by the right hon. gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire on the subject of our military expenditure. Ho deprecated any rash proceeding—any wholesale proceed ings—but he agreed with the right hon. gentleman in ex pressing a conviction that much reduction could be effected safely and prudently, and yet the establishments remain in a state of perfect efficiency. The right hon. gentleman had, however, expressed his opinion so fully that he had no de sire to add to what he said. In the royal speech, delivered on the 3d of February, Parliament was assured that the esti mates were framed with a due regard to economy. His opi nion of estimates was, that they ought to be drawn accord ing to the judgment and conscience of the Government, and not according to any pressure or inconvenience which, from political circumstances, they might anticipate. He took this the earliest opportunity of saying that when it was proposed the Speaker should leave the chair to go into committee of supply, it was his intention to propose a motion 'to tnis pur pose ; that in order to secure to the country that relief from taxation which it wasjustificd in expecting, it would bo ne cessary, in the judgment of the house, to revise, and further to reduce, the expenditure of the country. Ho claimed no authority in matters of finance, but he claimed such atten tion as an earnes t ap, lication of his mind and a conscientious judgment upon this subject could entitle him to. Ho must say that he had never known a time when the financial pro spects of the coun t ry were so mixed up as they then were ca with uti e Political hp a i ; t o e s op i affairs and pledges of the Admi n i s t ra ti on — nor ,tiicedefoirtswuecich choensaidemraeteitonasrodumeaueny,dasiffik,- Ideuvreinegeethaeundexext pfievnediturethe n years, to preserve eo balance Commons, between h Was e asked, aware of the mode and of the rate at which pend d it e u tu re ils h . ad o b n • a futur e .engeowin lie would our ex not now enter into any occasion it would be his duty to do thofe C had ful- so, and to consid er w h ether the Government filled its special obli ga ti ons of Controlling expendi ture of the country, and of ch ec ki ng the House when it showed an undue disp os i t i on to expenditu re . He s would, however, call their attenti on to a few facts. From 1842 to 1853, in these 12 years, which were y ears of im provement and social deyeloprnent—such wa s the expendi ture of the country, that there was no increase—at least an increase of a sum very trivial, In 1853 the expenditure was greater than in 1842 by only 234,00/. ; and he believed in 1853, which was not au inactive year, the expenditure was less than in 1842. Since 1842 a change had passed over the spirit of our dream—a change in the temper of the Govern ment—in the temper of the departments—in the temper of the House of Commons and of the country. Do not let them seek to shift the blame from their own shoulders, He something far from flattery. Considering the prospects held out to them for the year 1858-9 by his right hon. friend, and the certainty of a deficiency accruing for that year, he for one would not be responsible for it. He was astonished that a Government, which had been associated with many beneficial measures, should now be so negligent as to sanction a state ment which departed so far from the first principles of finance. He must lay, shortly, before the house the prospects then before them. In the years 1858-9 the estimated income was 66,365,000/. The house would recollect his right hon. friend had suggested the project of a sinking fund. Many members of the house objected to that arrangement. They told him that if peace came he would find that people did not , like the si n ki ng f und; they would make suggestions for its alteration, they w o old question its expediency, they would find a way to th row i t over or to evade it. That prophecy was laughed at by his right hon. friend at that time, but it had been fulfilled. Those persons bad made their appear ance, but he (Mr. Gladstone) scarcely expected to find them with his right hon. friend as their standard bearer. (Cheers.) Ho would not listen to their prayers —who laughed at their forebodings—who ridiculed their prophecies, now came for ward and said he thought it a very legitimate proposal to ap propriate this sinking fund for the next three years. (Hear, hear.) believed it was the natural and the necessary result of war. If they were governed by pure reason, no doubt the argu ment would be that when a larger expenditure than usual was needed for the purposes of war, they ought to be more economical in other respects. But instead of this, practi cally the case was just the reverse. In time of war, we contracted the ha its of extravagance. (Hear, hear.) War of necessity implied reckless expenditure. It was useless to complain, for it was in vain to attempt to control this ex penditure—nothing worth naming could be done. But not stewards cornelyastehae warbut the civil expenditure of the country was in -the temper of the House of Commons was infected by that expenditure, and they saw the i esult from 1842 that notwithstaud' to 1853 ; in t duty as e. But, 'whath the latter year they discharged their first to the people of England, and showed greater than in was not'ug the increase of population the ex penditureforlB42-12 years be at the estimates for oa!lted them, was the case now ? Look diture of 1853; in 12 6.7' as compared with the expen -in the four years froyears the growth was only 234,000/. 7,000,0001. To be surt"e 1853 to 1857 it was no less than the expenses of collectinsouitthing must be said for ow included; but still, after revenue, which were there was au increase of 6090,411 k i in g this deduction, expenses of the country; 3,600,0,;‘,. t0 the p ermanent ue / bik the • • estimates, 1,750,000/. civil service., and about military defraying the additional charges of the public • 750,0001. for debt N that was, he submitted, a state of things calculated . to ow rise to the most serious reflections. He b e li eved thisst . give went vioold be new to the country ; the public r a b i d haaante ot yet ea i • lised the fact to itself. Without speaking of the addition of expenditure by war, there was au enormously increased ex- 1. pencliture in the last four years. Were they prepared to die. ) : Tho CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—What I pro posed was the postponement of the commencement of it by three years. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) Mr. GLADSTONE said he felt anything rather than dis satisfied with the explanation as far as the purpose of his argument was concerned. He (Ur. Gladstone) had thought before that his right hon. friend really did propose to pay something, but now it seemed he was disposed to pay nothing —(hear, hear, and laughter)—but l eave it t o th e Chancellor of the Exchequer three years hence to commence it. He (Mr. Gladstone) thought he knew what that proposal meant. In 1855 there was a patriotic Government that would not under take to pay, but proposed a postponement. They had aycon tracted an obli ga ti on w hi ch they never acknowledged, and then they p os t pone d the i r obligation for tliree years, It was needless to a n ti c i pate what would be the rZsult of such a pro position, Fl ing, then, an income, in 1858-9, pr 66,365,0004, THE SUN, LONDON, SATURMAY EVENING; FEBRUARY 21, lgsl. he was going, in 1859, to abandon a sum of £5,300,000. He would still have 61,600,000/4 and, according to the last ar rangement, his expenditure would be 66,724,000/. It was quite true they might have adverse or prosperous harvests—they might have favourable or unfavourable turns in their wars with Persia and China ; but they had no right to expect to be able to fill up that deficiency, The proposal of his right hon. friend would leave them in the year 1860 with a deficiency of about 5,000,0001. sterling. He (Mr. Gladstone) must go on further • ' because his ri g ht b on , f r i en d did not abandon the income tax. He claimed credit with those who wished to see the termination of the income tax, which he (Mr. Gladstone) wished to see — (cheers)—and did not com mit themselves as he (Mr. Gladstone) did to their desire to realise such a state of expenditure and income as should bring about such a result. But he had added to the income tax— he had lessened greatly the probability of its termination. For a long period after the institution of the tax it was in. creased at the uniform rate of 7d., and the country was a t last convinced that 7d. was a rate of perpetuity, when, in 1848, the right hon. baronet the present First Lord of the Admiralty said that the 7d. must be perpetuate& (Sir C Wood expressed his dissent.) He (Mr. Gladstone) begged his pardon ; he thought it was se. (Hear, hear.) Well, then, in 1853 what did they do? They wanted to show to the country that Parliament had resolved that the income tax should lose its permanent character, and they invited Parliament to fix its legislative decline. By the act then passed, the tax was to be reduced from 6d. to 5d., and in 1860 it was to cease altogether. (Cheers.) Without fettering the judgment of the house, the Government of that day were labouring to bring the relation of income and expenditure into such a condition that Parliament might at that period put an end to the income tax. His right hon. friend bad ex. actly cancelled the vote of the temporary character of the in- Come tax, doing all that lay in his power to make the tax permanent. Whil s t his right hon. friend thus marked it as a permanent tax, he did not offer to reconstruct it. Unlike the Government of 1853, be had done what he could do to saddle the tax upon the people of this country for ever, (Cheers ) His right hon. friend had shown them what he thought with regard to the prospect of the termination of the income tax, but ho (Mr. Gladstone) would state what his opinion was upon this point. The Government of 1853 laid their ftnancial scheme before Parliament, not with a view to its being an arbitrary imposition of taxes, but as proceeding from an actual income and e x p en dit ure, an d ethaenses being m a d e b y th e law, and house such a st a t e o f t hi ngs i n the toh income tax to cease. Th e result thentl h B e 6 y l reliedas uponw o exhibitingu uponld enable certain was a balance of income over expenditure. His right hon. friend said there was nothing to prejudice the termination of the tax—that in 1859-60 the changes proposed were not very important, nor were they in 1360-61; but he had a defi c i enc y to start with of five millions and a half. H e w o uld lose th en 1,000,000/. upon Exchequer Bonds and 2,460,000/. upon in come tax. There would be a further loss of between 500,000/. and 600,000/. oa tea and sugar. In fact, his whole loss at ttat time would amount to 4,600,000/. The gain at same period would be 3.460,000/., and his right hon. friend would tnea be armin g only 1000,0007_ to his former deficiency—a trifling sum, with which he (Mr. Gladstone) owned he need not concern himself —making his whole deficiency a sum of 6,400,000/. In the following year the right hon. gentleman would lose one-half of his income tax, amounting to three millions and a half, and he had no gain to state against it. Therefore in the year 1861 the account would stand thus : the deficiency of 5 ,500,000/, in the year 1857.8 would be in creased in 1860 to 6,400,0001, and in 1861 he would lose 3,500,000/. more, making his whole deficiency a sum of about 8,600,000/., or very nearly that which was known as the war niuepence. After this it was for the house to con sider whether he w as r i ght in his belief that the real question raised to-night was whether all the pledges given and held out in 1853 were to be cast to the winds—(hear, hear)—and, secondly, whether, by a course of improvident expenditure and reckless finance, they were to charge the country in the meantime with a growing deficiency ; and whether it would not be absolutely necessary permanently to embody an income tax, uniformly raised, into our system of finance, in order to pay the public creditor, and preserve the solvency of the national treasury. (Cheers.) There was one other subject to which he (Mr. Gladstone) was compelled to allude to-night, and he was sorry to say it was one of the most painful parts of the whole subject to him. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) It appeared to be not so important to some gentlemen who sat behind the Ministerial benches. (Cheers.) The subject to which he alluded was that of indirect taxation. He had spoken of the speech of his right hon. friend as having been most unhappily calculated to convey untrue impressions to the country with respect to the removal of the income-tax— (hear)—and not only with regard to that, but to the fatal deficiency that was likely to take place in the public revenue, and he had to express his regret that that speech conveyed untrue expressions as regarded the important subject of in direct taxation. It was the first time in his recollection that he had heard proposals made from the Treasury beech of the nature he had listened to. He would go back to three Chan cellors of the Exchequer, Ho would go back to Sir R. Peel and to the right hon. member for Portsmouth (Sir F. Baring.) Every one of them, however different their politics might be, had given one and the same account of the beneficial effects which had been produced by the remission of indirect taxes, and though the right hon. member for Portsmouth had been compelled, by the pressure of circumstances, to make an in crease in the indirect taxes, he had done so no doubt with reluctance, and remembered it no doubt with regret. Sir R. Peel came into power, and, backed by an overwhelming majority and the popular feelin g , he destroyed p ro hibiti on , he liberated trade, an d reduceduties, and was not versed in the philosophy of Arthur Young. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman the member for Portsmouth, although he had, as he (Mr. Gladstone) had before stated,.in some case increased the indirect taxes, in no case increased them on articles of consumption. The right hon. gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire, when leader of the House of Commons, and representative of Lord Derby's Govern ment, and possessing the full confidence of those behind him, bore testimony to the immense advantage of the re• mission of indirect taxation, Without going further, then, and passing over the next link, they found the present Chancellor of the Exchequer adopting a different strain, and already in his place in the house questioning the effi ciency and the propriety of the work, Well, then, what had been the effect of the operation of that house with respect to the remission of these taxes ? He held in his h and a paper so remarkable that every man who loved truth or humanity, and was desirous .that his fellow creatures should enjoy all those benefits which it was iu the power of a good Govern ment to bestow, would not hesitate to yield their judgment and their heart to results so extraordinary. It appeared, then, that from 1842 to 1846 the British Parliament had, when a Conservative Government was in office, remittedtaxes to the amount of 8,050,0007. From the year,lB47 to the year 1851, when his noble friend the member for the City of Lon don was in office, the taxes remitted amounted to 5,310,000/. ; and from 1851 to 1854 they amounted to 4,655,000/. ; mak ing the total of taxes thus remitted 21,985,000/. Tne next taxation imposed within the same period amounted to 7,500,000/., leaving 1 4 ,485,000/. net remission of taxes. And the great bulk of the gain, what was it ? It was so mach addition to the comforts, and so much deduction from the privations, of humanity. (Cheers.) During the same period, whilst the taxes had decreased by seven millions, the revenue had increased by the same sum, for in 1842, the first year of that period, the revenue was 46 ,965,000/., whilst in 1853 it was 54,430,000/. It tle.refere was not too much to say that the remission of 22,000,000/. of taxation had not cost the country a single 'farthing. If, then, that was the effect of that blessed work, what was he to say of him who began the undoing of it. (Hear, hear.) What was the right hon. gentleman going to do I So far as they could judge from his statement on Friday last, it would appear that his innocent and harmless budget was going to remit, rather than increase, the taxes upon tea and sugar. The case stood thus —the war tax upon tea upon the sth of next April, would, as the law now stood, fall from Is. 9d. to ls. 3d. His right honourable friend proposed to raise it again to ls. 7d., and then he took credit to himself for a reduction in that duty of 20, N ow, it appeared to him (Mr. Gladstone) that so f ar f rom there being a reduction of 2d,, there was an actual 054,000/. The l s . p er cwt, upon sugar increase of 4d., and the effect would be an a d vance i n th e year t hon. gentleman b e i ng ca l cu l a t e d as p lB r 0 5 p 7 0 - 8 e e , d u p by y n t the e a o g l h , upon 7,250,000 cwt., gave 362,0001., which, being added to the tea duties, gavea result of 1,416,0007., which hisright hon. friend proposed to extract from the consumers of tea and sugar in this kingdom during the ensuing year. ; and that sum was to be increased in the year 1858-9 to 2,0 00,000/, He (Mr. Glad. stone) believed it to be the pride of the Liberal party of this country to assist in the remission of indirect taxes, (Hear.) He trusted that they would, in the present instance, adhere to that their pride ; and, with regard to the house generally, he would beg them to consider well the position in which they were the income-tax themselves placed. He remembered well wh en S ir R. Peel, after having stated the deficiency iu the reven ue, turned round to his party, and having announced his inte n ti on to take off 140,0001. of in adni r s e w c e t r t e a d x . e h h e e r e appealed t e oc objections ms toto saddle income tax to meet the defici eeeY, an d that appeal was nobly rae_taxupowin other h h a e n r grounds, and the Parliament of 1 841, to a man, stood firm, and took upon themselves and the wealthier classes between 5,000,000/. and 6,000,000/. of taxation, in order to lighten the burdens of the less wealthy classes, besides 1,400,000/. of indi rect taxes. The h ouse was t h en called upon to admit 1,400,009/, of indirect taxes; they were called upon now to impose them. , They were then called upon to take new burdens upon them selves, in order to relieve the great masses of the country; they were now called upon to take the burdens off the shoulders of the wealthier classes in orderehat they might put in tirect taxes upon the tea and sugar ccnsumed by every labouring family in the kingdom. He (Mr. Gladstone) could only say, for his part, that he entertained the most decided opinion on this question, and nothing should prevent him from giving every constitu tional opposition to the carrying out of the financial scheme now proposed ; and, before the Speaker left the chair, he should call upon the house not to impose more duties upon tea and sugar. With regard to the bearing of his opi nion upon the motion then before the house, he said, if they were to have additional taxes upon tea and sugar, that was a prima facie case that they were to have a deficiency. He frankly said that this motion of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) appeared to him to be in conformity with the declaration he made en the first night of the session, and that motion afforded to him (Mr. Gladstone) a practical mode of doing good to the public. He maintained that the proposals of the Government showed clearly a course of increasing de ficiency —a deficiency unparalleled in anything ho could re. member in public life for 25 years. It was the first duty of the House of Commons to say that they will have no de ficiency, and when they had once said that their way would be clear. Upon a former night he (Mr. Gladstone) ventured to lament the extreme deadue.ss of the public mind on the subject of expenditure, and to express his opinion of the largeness our expenditure was assuming ; and he said now, if this motion should be lost, he should be driven to make a motion upon expenditure. That was one of his motives for supporting the motion of the right hon. gentleman. The other motive was that he thought it was entirely in support of those pledge s a, •-•Y which he thought himself bound, and by which he also thought those gentlemen who sat on the Go vernment benches were bound. He felt it to be perfectly practicable by a wise economy, and by an appeal Co tie good sense of the Commons of England, to reduce- taxation, and to enable them to maintain a surplus income, and give that largo relief in 1860, which, as far as was in their power, they premised to give in 1853, He might be right or might be wrong—his judgment might err, like that of other men—but this was the first time —not the first time he dad heard a de ficiency recommended by the Government—but that he had hear(' such a proposition as that of the Chancellor of the Ex chequer—a plan which seemed to him (Mr. Gladstone) to threaten to land them in financial confusion. At any rate it was their duty to strip the veil from a statement which cer tainly conveyed false impressions to the country. It was their duty to bear testimony in open day to the principles of truth and honesty ; it was a Public obligation to strip the veil from every scheme that tended to do away with these principles. That duty ho had now endeavoured to discharge, and in con clusion he would say that no considerati )n could induce him to put forward a financial scheme which was not based upon those principles—principles which were intimately associated not only with the credit and honour, but even with the safety, of this empire. (Loud cheers.) Mr. J. WILSON was sure he should not appeal to the house in vain for its indulgence. While he could not follow his right hon. friend through the whole of the subject upon which he had touched, he would endeavour to place before the house in a clear and succinct form what he deemed to be the errors of the right hon. gentleman. There were some topics upon which his right hon. friend and the Chancellor of the Zxchequcr, in cowmen with all the raombero of tko Government, and a great majority of the house were agreed. It had been put very strongly by him that the house should, if possible, carry out the implied contracts into which Par liament entered in 1853. In that they all agreed. He also said that the house should not sanction a deficiency in the revenue. That he believed to be equally the determina tion of his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exche quer, and, indeed, of every financier in that house. The right hon. gentleman had also spoken in pathetic language of the advantage arising from the repeal of indirect taxes ; that was the very subject they were discussing, and formed the main topic of the speech of his right hon. friend. With 'respect to the sugar duties, in what condition were they during the glorious career of Sir R. Peel ?'.'The lowest duty was 14s per owt, and the highest was 23s 8d • now the highest duty was only 14s per cwt. It was only by the greatest possible efforts--not so well supported as they might have been by his right hon friend, that this reduction was effected. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in givingthe quotation from Mr. A. Young, justified the proposition which he madeto the house, that the additional taxation necessary for the war was fairly leviable from all classes of taxes, whether direct or indirect. Beyond that, he did not apply the principle or the maxim so propounded. But was this a new principle they were propounding in times of peace, with the obligations of war ? (Hear, hear.) They could not argue this question as though they were entirely liberated from all obligations arising from the war. How did they meet the war expenditure in 1854 when the right hon. gentleman was Chancellor of the Exchequer? Did they think it necessary to supply all the means for c arr yi ng on the war by direct Oration. Did they not consider it necessary, in justice to the interests of the general commu nity, to impose some indirect as well as direct taxes ? Was not the principle of the present budget the very same which was found in the first war budget of his right hon. friend ? (Cheers.) In 1851 there was an increase of the sugar duties, and a suspension of the fall of the tea duties. The right hon. gentleman, in bringing forward his budget for that year said that it was impossible to ask for any re duction in the revenue arising from the sugar duties; on the contrary, that there must be a present increase ; and he proceeded to adopt the precise course which his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer was following —(hear)—namely, suspending the reduction in the duties upon sugar. In the following November, during the short session before Christmas, his right h on . f r i en d, knowing that the duty upon tea would fall to is. 3d. in the follow ing April, suspended the fall of the duty. [An. hon. mem ber, " War, war."] True, it was a time of war ; but were they not now talking of war ? (Hear.) In the very year that he raised these duties he issued two millions of bonds in anticipation of the payment of taxes. In the same year he issued four more millions of bonds, making six millions to be provided for. (Hear.) So that, although in a state of peace, we were still burdened with the obligations aris ing from the war. A paper had been circulated among the members of the house, showing what these obligations were. For the next year they amounted to 3,671,0001. ; for the following year they amounted to 4,824,000/. ; and for th e thi r d y ear t o 4 , 707 , 000 1. Was not that expenditure just as ranch war expenditure as any which they had had during the war? Was not the money which they were now called upon to pay expended for the purposes of the war ? (Cheers.) The bonds were issued in discharge of the obligations of the war, and they were now called upon to pay them. (Hear.) *hat was their position at the commencement of the present financial year ? They had an income tax of 16d. in the pound, producing 16 millions. There would have been a loss of three millions upon the tea and sugar duties. It became the duty of the Govern ment to consider how the war expenditure should be met. If the Government bad stood to their legal position— , which it was never their intention to do—there would have been a surplus of five millions of income tax, which, as the right hon gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli) had candidly admitted, could not be made available. Situated as his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer was, what did he determine, and, in his (Hr. Wilson's) opinion, determine wisely to do ? He said, we don't require the 16d. income tax during the first year, but additional taxation will be necessary during the two following years, and ac cordingly he took off the 9d. income tax, and asked the house to sanction the suspension of the reduction of duties on tea and sugar for the two following years. That ap peared to him to be the course the most convenient for the finances of the country. His right hon. friend (Mr. Glad stone) had urged that because the Chancellor of the Exche quer relinquished the income tax for the present year, he therefore gave up the income which belonged to the years 1858-9, and thereby caused a deficit; but it appeared to him (Hr. Wilson) that his right hon. friend had fallen into a great error when he stated to the house that what the Chancellor of the Exchequer Had done was to take the in come of 1858-9 and balance it against the expenditure of 1853-4 ? What the Chancellor of the Exchequer had really stated was this : he gave the probable income of 1858-9 as 62,300,000/. Now the expenditure of 1853-4, including all the cost of collection, was only 55,860,0001., so that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had left a margin over and above the year 1853-4 of no less than between seven and eight millions sterling. But, said his right hon. friend (Mr. Gladstone), does the Chancellor of the Exchequer mean to tell the house that he is prepared to bring down the expendi ture of 1858-9 to the level of 1853.4, and then went on to refer to charges in the civil service estimates, which, he contended, were beyond the control of Government. - He (Hr. Wilson) was prepared to admit that those estimates were beyond the control of Government; but he would state to the house what would be the finances of those years In 1858-9 the income would probably be, as he before stated. 62,300,0001., taking the most limited and moderate estimate, and making no allowance for the expansion of trade. and the stimulus it would receive from the great reduction of the income tax and other burdens. The ex penditure of 1853-4, which the Chancellor of the Exche quer did not take as a standard of expenditure, but selected from the fact that that was the last and highest year of peace expenditure, amounted to 55,840,000/., to which must be added a sum of 2,435,0001. for charges consequent upon the war, making a total expenditure of 58,276,0001., and leaving a surplus of 4,034,000/. over and above the estimated expenditure of 1853-4. That surplus, no doubt, would have to be charged with the payment of 2,000,0001. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was not in a position to hazard an opinion to the house before the estimates of the present year had been considered, or to fix what the esti mated expenditure of the next year would be. Who, he might ask, would be so bold, situated as the Chancellor of the Exchequer was, to do so? In 1853 his right hon. friend (Mr. Gladstone) proposed, within two years, to re duce the income tax to 6d. ' and in two years m ore t o 5d., but within 12 months o f his making that statement be was obliged to raise it twice, besides imposing additional indirect taxes. (Cheers.) Who, after that example, and with the experience of financiers before Lim, would hazard a calculation as to the probable position of the country the year after next? (Hear, hear.) They had, according to that estimate, even supposing they ha paid the bonds and the sinking fund, still a margin of one and a half millions over the estimates. Again, for the years 1859-60 the esti mated income was 62,620,0001., the estimated expenditure 58,731,0001., leaving a margin of 3,889,0001. But his right honourable friend throughout his address insisted upon fastening upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer the expenditure of the present year as the basis of expenditure for all years to come—(hear, hear)—but supposing they were discussing this question a year ago it was a year of peace, and we had reduced our expenditure—yet would it, he asked, be fair to take it as a criterion for all years to come ? We are now, to a great extent, in the same- posi tion, for it was utterly impossible for the different.depart ments of the slate to be reduced within a year or two of the conclusion of a great war to the lowest possible point. His right hon. friend, in referring to the items of building and construction, said that no reduction could be made in them, but he (Mr. Wilson) thought that those were the very points upon which reduction was practicable, for when once buildings were put up, er ships constructed, there was no further expense. On the whole, he could not but think that his right hen. friend the ex-Chancellor .of the Exchequer (Hr. Gladstone) bad shown his usual fair ness throughout his speech, and more particularly in insisting upon the present year's estimates as the only standard for future years. He must indeed say, after listening to his right hon. friend's speech with the greatest attention and admiration, that he could not at that mo ment understand very clearly what his real views were, and what the fault that he found with the budget. Was it that Government had repealed too many taxes or too few ? (Hear.) Did he complain that Government was about to leave the finances in a deficit, or unnecessarily to burden the rondo with taxation? These questions, he con ceived, were the very basis of all subsequent inquiry. That house was not, he imagined, a debating club. It was supposed to be practically at work to raise means for securing by income the expenditure of the country. His hon. and learned friend had certainly made one practical ob servation when he said he objected to the amount of the estimates. That, however, was a question which the House of Commons would have to decide, and in thatlay the incon venience, and, as he thought, the injustice with which they were treating the Chancellorof the Exchequer. They bad, in the first instance, pressed him to produce bis budget before they had decided what the expenditure should be, and they then blamed him for asking more money than they deemed necessary. His right hon. friend insisted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was landing them in a deficit. But how ? Was it by repealing the 9d. income tax ? He scarcely thought so, because that appeared to have given universal satisfaction. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had added 2d. more to the income tax for the two follow ing years. Would that step involve h deficit ? All in fact that the right hon. gentleman had done had been with the view of preventing a deficit. It was urged that he ought to have provided fora possible increase of the expenditure of the next two years ; but he need hardly ask them whe ther the house would have been disposed to consent to ad ditional taxation. It was not fair to say that his right hon. friend had done anything to render less possible the repeal of the income tax in 1860. (Hear, hear.) No doubt the occurrence of the war might have had the effect of rendering its repeal more remote, and his right hon. friend had the misfortune to be obliged to provide in a time of peace for obligations created hy others in a period of war. Then, his right hon. friend the mem ber for the University of Oxford had referred in eloquent language to the operation of the repeal of indirect taxes in some of the more populous districts of the country • but he must admit th a t th e consequences o f suc h a repeal very much depend upon the state of the market when it takes place. They might repeal duties at a time when such re peal would have no beneficial effect whatever on the inte rests of the consumer-4e meant when the stock of com modities was low, and when the reduction of the duty merely went to swell the profit of the producer or importer. He believed his right hon. friend (the Chancellor of the w d hi au h l adopted e r d ig ought to t . o friend u Exchequer) that h a had hadta taken a u beeng great a w t e p ll ai a dvised ua t u i fuponurm himselfthe subject, u wh an a d t way the markets would be affected by the duties whi c h h e savedpr h e idm; fromand thethe imputationscourse he Lad a who had last spoken had cast upon him in regard to th e backward movement he had made respecting these indi rec t taxes. He (Hr. Wilson) believed the effect of the budget to be that, while it provided effectually and fully for all the income and expenditure of the year, it did nothing what ever to impair the prospects which Chancellors of the Ex chequer might have in coming years of meeting the obliga tions cast upon them. On the contrary, it would do a great deal to modify their difficulties, and to enable them to meet these obligations. There were two points in the againstif any deficiencies should arise, in and future t w ur ia sl ic y b ea was b N y n w o , Now, l i ght h on . gen tleman' s reso l u ti on which he hoped would be met by a negative. The first w as th a t t h ey should so arra nge their income and e x p en dit ure i n the present year as to was the house pr . epared to suppl y this year the deficie nc i es of future years, me ans certain. If it was no t , the proposition of the right hon. gentleman must fall t o th e ground. Again, were they prepared to say that th ey were now in a condition to do more than they we re d o i ng for the purpose of securing provide the final extinction of the income tax in 1860 ? He thought, after they had been so frequently disapr ointed on this sub ject, it would be very unwise to come to a solemn resolu tion to that effect at present. When Sir R. Peel renewed the tax in 1845, for three years, he did not pledge himself absolutely to its then coming to an end, but he expressed a hope that they would then be able to dispense with it. But what was the result ? In the first year the Irish famine came; in the next that famine became more severe and extensive; and in the following year there was great commercial distress, and the conseqtirMee was, not only that the House of Commons was not in it condition to abandon the income tax, but tligt the Chancel!: , r of the Exchequer had to impose an addition to it, and also to create a debt of 6,00"',0001. Was that any encouragement to them to pass now a resolution like that before the house The result of the calculations with regard to the proceeds of the succession duty also showed how futile it was to enter into computations and speculations as to what the expenditure and income would be at a future period. All they could do was, to avoid doing any thing in the meantime, either by unnecessary expen diture, or, by unnecessary or hasty additions to taxa tion, to endanger the settlement which the country and the house had set their hearts upon. Beyond that he contended no Government had power to go. (Hear.) Having been enabled to apply himself effectually to this subject, he trusted that what he had stated would be received as his sincere convictions. He only wished he had been in;a condition to have done more justice to it. (Cheers.) Mr. LAING said the hon. gentleman who had just sat down had asked what practical object any member on that (the Ministerial) side of the house proposed to himself in voting for the motion of the fight hon. gentleman oppo site. He now rose to answer that question. He proposed to entertain the object which was entertained in 1848, when the Ministers in that year having brought in a budget containing estimates which were considered by the house excessive, that budget was sent back to them for re vision, and a new budget was proposed with estimates framed with greater attention and care, which gave the country for many years to come a saving of no less than between 2,000,0001. and 3,000,0001. in the amount of the annual expenditure. (near ) Mr. Gladstone had stated the remarkable fact that from 1842 to 1843, the expen litnre of this country had remained stationary, while in the four years from 1853 to 1i57 the ordinary permanent ex penditure had increased between 5,000,0001. and 6,000,0001. sterling. It was therefore quite time for every one who called himself a practical reformer to bestir himself in order to resist this increasing expenditure. The more ho looked upon the estimates the less encouragement he felt iu the hope that the revenue would next year come up to the ex penditure. Comparing the estimates of 1843 with those of the present year he found that whereas the charge for manufactories, docks, and steam-engine factories had in that year amounted to 2,700,0001., the estimate for the present year amounted to 3,800,0001. —being an increase of 1,100,0001., or about 45 per cent. of the whole expenditure of 1853. It was now proposed to expend on new military and naval erections 1,506,000/., whereas the amount charged under the same head in 1853 had been only 951,000/. He did not see why such expenditure should be incurred, and though the annihilation of the Russian fleet and the general results of the war went to show that it was not now required. On the motion of Ur. JAMES AI`GREGOR the debate was then adjourned. The Reformatory Schools Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on next Friday fortnight. The lonian Subjects Commission Bill passed through committee. The Public Health Supplemental Bill (1357) passed through committee without discussion. _ _ _ The Grand Juries (Ireland) Bill was brought in, and ordered to be read a second time on Monday. Mr. MAGUIRE moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend the act for lighting, cleansing, and watching cities and corponite and market towns in Ireland. ARMY PROMOTIONS. On the motion of Col. LINDSAY, the following address was agreed to :—For a return of the names of all non commissioned officers of the army who were promoted to commissions while serving in the field with the army of the East, between the first day of May, A 54, and the first day of August, 1856 ; stating the regiment to which they belonged, and the regiment or corps to which they were promoted, and specifying if they received appointments as adjutants or quartermasters, and if now serving on full or half-pay. The house adjourned, at 12 o'clock, to Monday next. From the London Gazette of Last Night. LORD CHAMBERLAIN'S•OFFICE, FEB. 19. Notice is hereby given, that his Royal Highness Prince Albert will, by the desire of her Majesty, hold Levees at St. James's Palace, on bshalf of her Majesty, on the fol- lowing days, at two o'clock :—Thursday, the 26th inst., and Thursday, the 12th March next. It is her Majesty's plea sure that presentations to his Royal Highness at these Levees shall be considered equivalent to presentations to the Queen. Addresses to the Queen may either be forwarded to her Majesty through the Secretary of State for the Home Department, or may be reserved until her Majesty shall hold a levee. REGULATIONS TO BE OBSERVED AT THE LEVEES AT ST. JAMES'S PALACE. The noblemen and gentlemen who purpose to attend the levees at St. James's Palace are requested to bring with them two large cards, with their names clearly written thereon, one to be left with the Queen's Page in Atten dance in the Ante-Room, and the other to be delivered to the Lord Chamberlain, who will announce the name to his Royal Highness. Those gentlemen who are to be presented are hereby in formed, it is absolutely necessary that their names, with the name of the nobleman or gentleman who is to present them, should be delivered at the Lord Chamberlain's Office, before twelve o'clock on the Tuesday previ ous to each Levee, or on any earlier day between the hours of eleven and four, in order that they may be submitted for approbation ; it being her Majesty's com mand that no presentation shall be made at the Levees but in conformity with the above regulations. It is particularly requested, that in every case the names be very distinctly written upon the cards to be delivered to the Lord Chamberlain, in order that there may be no difficulty in announci ng them. The state apartments will not be open for the reception of company coming to Court until half-past one o'clock. LORD CHAMBERLAIN'S OFFICE, FEB. 20. Notice is hereby given, that the State Apartments of Windsor Castle will be re-opened on and after Monday next, the 23d instant. CR 0 WN•OFFICE, FEB. 17. MEMBERS RETURNED TO SERVE IN THE PRESENT PARLIAMENT. Borough of Bandon Bridge.—Captain the Honourable William Smyth Bernard, of the Farm, near Bandon, in the room of the Honourable Francis Bernard (commonly called Viscount Bernard), now Earl of Bandon, a Peer of Ireland. FEB. 19. _ . County of Limerick—The Right Hon. William Monsell, President of the G-neral Board of Health. Borough of Clonmel—John Bagwell, Esq., of Marlfield, in the county of Tipperary, in the room of John O'Connell, Esq., who has accepted the office of Clerk of the Crown and Hanaper in Ireland. WAR-OFFICE, PALL-MALL, FEB. 20. MILITARY TRAIN. TO BE LIEUTENANT-COLONELS. _ _ Lieut.-Colonel John Lucas Wilton, C. 8., from half-pay 50th Foot. Lietit.-Colonel George Erskine, from half-pay un attached. Lieutenant J. llesketh. Ensign J. Sweeny. Ensign W. Shackleton. Ensign W. Thompson. Ensign J. Craig. TO ER' QUARTERMASTERS. Quartermaster Aden. , M‘Bride,l from half•pay 39th Foot, late Paymaster Land Transport Corps. Second Captain Joseph Cheese, from the Land Transport Corps. Quartermaster Wm. Lambert, from the Land Trans port Corps. Quartermaster John Gannon, from the Land Transport Corps, Quartermaster J. Stalford, front the Land Transport Corps. Quartermaster J. Copeland, from the Land Transport Corps. Cornet Robert Craig, from the Land Transport Corps. TO BE RIDING MASTER. Lieutenant halliard Noake, from Dumfries Militia. TO BE SURGEONS. Staff-Surgeon of the Second Class Francis Raynel•is. Staff Surgeon of the Second Class Fenwick Martin Tweddell, from half-pay. Staff-Surgeon of the Second Class Alexander Mackay Macbeth, from half-pay. Staff-Surgeon of the Second Class John Andrew Wool froyes, from half-pay. TO BE VETERINARY SURGEONS. Veterinary Surgeon W. Gloag, from the 11th Hussars. Veterinary Surgeon William Death, from the Land Transport Corps. Veterinary Surgeon William Varley, from the Land Transport Corp.. Veterinary Surgeon John James Channon, from the Land Transport Corps. Veterinary-Surgeon T. Paton, from the Land Transport Corps. Veterinary-Surgeon J. Burr, from the Land Transport Corps. Veterinary-Surgeon G. r.leraing, from the Land Trans port Corps. COMMISSIONS SIGNED BY LORD-LIEUTENANTS. Gloucester—Leonard Maryus Strachey, Esq., and Chas. William Stoughton, Esq., to be Deputy Lieutenants. County of Dorset—Hastings Nathaniel Middleton, Esq., and Charles Wriothesly Digby, Esq., to be Deputy Lieu tenants. Haddington, Berwick, Linlithgow, and Peebles Regi ment of Militia Artillery—Archibald Dickson. jun., to be Second Lieutenant, vice Lovell, promoted. TO BE MAJOR& Brevet-Lieut.-Colonel John Rowley Heyland, from half-pay Unattached. Major Henry Ralph Browne, from half-pay Unattached, Captain James Peter Robertson, from 31st Foot. Captain Joseph Salie, from C ,pe Mounted Rifles. TO BE CAPTAINS. Brevet-Major John Joseph Wood, from 82d Foot. Second Captaia James Morris Hill, from half-pay Royal Artillery. Captain John M'Court, from half-pay 88th Regiment. Captain Peter John Macdonald, from 3d West India Regiment. Captain Arthur Wellesley Williams, from half-pay Un attached. C tptain Godfrey Cooper, from 41th Foot. Brevet-Major Charles Robert Shervinton, from 46th Foot. Captain James Hornby Buller, from half-pay 57th Foot. Captain James Henry Wyatt, from half-pay 79th Foot. Captain William Braybrooke, from 95th Foot. Captain John Canavan, from half-pay 18th Foot. Captain George Swaby, from half-pay Unattached. Captain Henry Nason, from the Land Transpoit Corps. Captain Henry Richmond Hoghton Gale, from half-pay 48th Foot. Captain Godfrey Clerk, from half-pay Unattached. Lieutenant George P. Edward Morrison, from the 22d Foot. Lieutenant John Simeon Francis Dick, from 78th Foot, Lieut. W. Baker, from 4>th Foot. Lieut. W. G. D. Massy, from 19th Regiment. TO BE LIEUTENANTS. Lieut. G. A. Rogers, from 3d West India Regiment. Lieut. J. Powell, from 39th Foot. Cornet D. Gibson, from 2d Dragoons. Ensign J. Blake, from 47th Foot. Second Captain Wm. Banks, from the Land Transport Corps. Second Captain John Jones, from the Land Transport Corps. Second Capt. C. Hutton, from the Land Transport Corps. Second Capt. J. Young, from the Land Transport Corps. Second Capt. St. John Willans, from the Land Trans. port Corps. Second Capt. H. Miller, from the Land Transport Corps. Lieut. G. R. Caldwell, from the Land Transport Corps. Adjutant W. Corbett, from the Land Transport Corps. Lieut. J. Harris, from the Land Transport Corps. Lieut. T. Fletcher, from the Land Transport Corps. Lieut. T. Witchell, from the Land Transport Corps. Lieut. W. E. Cater, from the Land Transport Corps. Lieut. E. Sherwood, from the Land Transport Corps. Lieut. A. Murphy, from the Land Transport Corps. Lieut. W. H. Dawson, from the Land Transport Corps. Lieut. L. J. Keogh, from the Land Transport Corps. Adjutant R. W. Jenkins, from the Land Transport Carps. Lieut. J. McLoughlin, from half-pay Osmanli Horse Artillery. Lieutenant George Symons, from the half-pay Osmanli Horse Artillery. Lieutenant James Thorburn, from the half-pay Osmanli Horse Artillery. Lieutenant Robert Bruce, from the half-pay Osmanli Horse Artillery. Lieutenant John Devine, from the half-pay Osmanli Horse Artillery. Lieutenant Daniel Dowling, from the half-pay Osmanli Horse Artillery. Adjutant J. Hesketb, from the Land Transport Corps. Captain Christian W. McNiell, from the Hants Militia, and attached as Captain to the Land Transport Corps. Captain E. M. Palliser, late of the West Cork Militia, and attached as Captain to Land Transport Corps. Arthur Hunt, Gent., from half-pay, as Deputy-Assis tant-Commissary Field Train Department Royal Artillery, and attached as Captain to Land Transport Corps. C. W. Farwell, Gent., attached as Lieutenant to Land Transport Corps. TO BE ENSIGNS. Cornet John William Beatty, from the Land Transport Corps. Cornet Frederic Boni, from the Land Transport Corps. Cornet John Bruen Rutledge, from the Land Transport Corps. Cornet Redmayne Burrell Foster, from tho Lend Trans. port Corps. Cornet Vincent Aplin, from the Land Transport Corps. Cornet Edward Jervis, from the Land Transport Corps. Cornet James Bodkin, from the Land Transport Corps. Cornet Joseph Smith, from the Land Transport Corps. Cornet William 31 `Call, from the Land Transport Corps. Cornet Jobn Sweeny, from the Land Transport Corps, Cornet William Shackloton, from the Land Transport Cows. Cornet William Thompson, from the Land Transport Corps. Cornet James Craig, from the Land Transport Corps, Cornet John Briggs, from the Land Transport Corp. TO BE ADJUTANTS. Lieutenant R. W. Jenkins. Lieutenant John X`LoPghlin, BANKRUPTS. John Weston, manufacturing chemist, Mottram, Che shire, to surrender, March 3 and 30, at twelve, at the Manchester District Court. Fraser, official assignee, Man chester ; Hewitt and Needham, Manchester. Edward Joseph Morris ; spirit dealer, Malpas, Cheshire, March 3 and April 6, at e leven, at the Liverpool District Court. Morgan, official assignee, Liverpool ; Etcher, Whitchurch ; Tyrer, Liverpool. Ann Oliver, grocer, Walkington, Yorkshire, March 4, and April 1, at tirelve, at the Leeds District Court. Car rick, official assignee, Hull ; Robinson and Atkinson, Beverley and Hull. Henry William Collison, provision merchant, Bath, March 3, and April 6, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court. Acraman, official assignee, Bristol ; Gibbs, Bath. Thomas Hudson, ship broker, Liverpool, March 3 and April 7, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Caze• nova, official assignee, Liverpool ; Chilton, Liverpool. James Bassnett and Thomas Bassnett, opticians, Liver pool, March 4 and April 8, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Morgan, official assignee, Liverpool ; Hiatt, Wellington ; Evans and Son, Liverpool. James Beech Hill, china dealer, Blackfriars-road, Surrey, March 2, at twelve, and April 6, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee, Gnildhall-cham hers ; Cordwell, College-hill, City. Henry Garnett., stationer, Dover, March 3, at half-past two, and 3 , , at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Edwards, official assignee, Basinghall-street ; Chidley, Basinghall treet. _ _ _ _ Robert Lee, currier and leather cutter, Cromford, Derby, March 10 and 31, at half-past ten, at the Shire hall, Nottingham. Harris, official assignee, Nottingham; Smith, Derby ; Reece, Birmingham. Wililiam Baker, clock maker, Birchall-street, Birming ham, March 5 and April 2, at half-past eleven, at the Bir mingham District Court. Whitmore, official assignee, Bir• mingliam ' • Baldwin, Birmingham. Robert Rumney Charles and William Fordyce, paper manufacturers, Haughi on, Northumberland, March 6, at eleven, and April 8, at twelve, at the Newcastle-upon-Tyne District Court. Baker, otlicial assignee, Newcastle-upon- Tyne ; Bell, Broderick, and Bell, Bow Churchyard; Head and Son, Hexham. assignee, James Cowan, cheesemonger , Newcastle - upon - Tyne , March 4, at eleven, and April 7, at twelve, at the New castle-upon-Tyne District Court. Baker , official Newcastle-upon-Tyne ; Watson, Newcastle-upon-Tyne ; Harwood, Clement's-lane. James Basse and Solomon Lindo, wine and spirit mar. chants, Tower-hill, March 6, at one, and April 6, at half past two, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Nicholson, official assignee, Basinghall-street ; Lawrence, Smith, and Fair don, Bread-street, Cheapside. John Chalcroft, builder, Paddington, March 6, at twelve, and April 6, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Nichol son, official assignee, Basinghall-street ; Lawrence, Smith, and Fawdon, Bread-street, Cheapside. Peter Steffano, ship chandler, Weliclose-square, Mid dlesex, March 6, at one, and April 4, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee, Basing hall-street ; Williamson, Hill, and Williamson, Great James-street, Bedford-row. Samuel Potter, livery-stable keeper, High-street, Mary lehone, Feb. 27 and April 3, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Cannan, official assignee, Aldermanbury; May, Russell-square. Thomas Jones, bottle-merchant, New Broad-street, City, March 3, and 31, at two, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Graham, official assignee; Chidley, street. James Truscott, commission agent, Austin Friars, March 3, at half-past eleven, and March 31 at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Stansfeld, official assignee; Wyatt, Vernlam-buildings, Gray's-inn. John Gillam, Devereux-court, Strand, and Wm. Henri Tayler, licensed victuallers, Poultry, March 4, at two, and April 1, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, official assignee ; King and George, King-street, Cheep* side. George Henderson, apothecary, Stanhope-place, Be' gent's-park, March 5 at half-past one, and April 4 et twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Johnson, official assignee, Basinghall-street ; Chidley, Basinghall-street. Edward Baldwin, newspaper proprietor, Shoe-lane, March sat la,lf-past eleven, and April 2at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Johnson, official assignee, Basing* hall-street ; Barker, Bowker, and Peake, Gray's-inn. square. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. Donald Campbell, carter, Glasgow. John Robb, painter, Edinburgh. W. and T. Kerr, wrights, Glasgow. William Stewart, tacksman, Barnaline, Argyllshire, now deceased. George Cromer, malt liquor merchant, Glasgow. James Nicol, bulker, Aberdeen. BANK OF : An Account pursuant to the Act the Week ending on Saturda: 18131:1E DEP, Notes issued ...... .• 24,054,270 !,NGLAND. rth and Bth Victoria, cap. 32, for the 14th lay of Feb., 1857. LATMENT. X Government debt .... 11,015,100 Other securities...... 3,459,500 Gold coin and bullion 9,579,270 Silver bullion ... ...... -- 424,054,270 £24,054,270 MARiIiA.LL, Chief Cashier. ,1857. ,PLETMENT. Dited the 19th day of February, Government securities (Includg.Dead Weight Annuity) .......... 11,545,079 Other securities ...... 1420 794 Notes • ... .......... 5,257,855 Gold and silver coin.. 680,390 I 435,731,043 u - . MARSHALL, Chief Caskier. ~ 1857. BANKING DE' -•roprietors'capital .. 14,553,000 nest ........ 3,525,742 Public deposit E (in cluding Exchequer, Commissioners of National Debt, Sav- ing's Banks, and Dividend Accounts) 7,037,607 _Mier depoCts ...... 9,773,053 z,ven Day and other 797,641 £35,731.048 Dated the 19th day of February, AVERAGE PRICE OF SUGAR. - - ----- The Average Price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar, corn. puted from the returns made in the week ending Feb. 17, 1857, exclusive of the Duties of Customs paid or payable thereon, on the importation thereof into Great Britain : a. d. From the British Possessions in America 39 31 Muscovado, the produce of the Mauritius 39 0 Muscovado, the produce of the East Indies 42 71 Average of the above three descriptions 4l 1 COURSE OF EXCHANGE.-YEST3UDAT. 11 16 Gibraltar Ditto, three months .. 11 18!4 Leghorn .......... •..• 29 47% Rotterdam ............ 11 18 Genoa ..•• 25 75 Antwerp .............. 25 45 Milan .......• ........ Brussels .............. 25 45 Venice........• • ...... llamburgh ............ 13 7% Naples . • .•• 411 X Altona •• ••.•••••• • •• • • Palermo •• •• 129% Paris • ..... • • ...•• • • .... 25 27% Messina .. • • 130 Ditto, three months .. 25 6744 Lisbon ........ si% Marseilles 25 67% Oporto .. •• •• •• •• •• •• •• 51S Rourdeaux !Rio Janeiro ..... . • • Frankfort-on• Maine •• Buenos Ayre5..•...... Berlin New York,6o days' eight —. Vienna.......... •• .... 10 30 Philadelphia •• ..... . Trieste........ •• •• •• •. 10 32 PRICES OF ztriarox, rim ox. Petersburg 373 Foreign Gold In Bars £3 17 Madrid 49Y Portugal Gold Coin .. 0 0 0 Cadiz „ 49% Mexican Dollars .... 0 0 0 Barcelona .......... New Dollars ....•• 0 0 0 Silver in bars ....... e a 1% BIRTHS. OF A SON. On tho 19th inst., at Southfield, Wandsworth, the wife of John S. Peirce, Esq. On the 18th inst., at Eton College, the wife of the Per. Charles Wolicy. OF A DAUGHTIIR. On the 19th inst., at C arlton -house-terrace, the wife of the Count of Bernstorff, Prussian Ambassador at this Court. On the 19th inst., at Thornton-heath, Croydon, Mrs. John Bradbury. MARRIED. On the 19th inst., at Trinity Church, Marylebone, Lieut.• Colonel Thomas, Royal Artillery, to Mary Elizabeth, the youngest daughter of the late Mr. Sergeant D'Oyly. On the 19th inst., at St. George's, Hanover-square, th• Rev. Bag,enal Burdett Newenham, of Teffont Magna, Wilts, to Helen Louisa Knapp, youngest daughter of the late Ham• bly Knapp, Esq., of Brook -street, Grosvenor-square, DIED At Lupton Devon , on the 20th inst., Elizabeth, wife of Sir J. B. Y. Buller, Bart M.P., in the 54th year of her age. On the 19th inst., at Holloway, Islington, Mr. Geo. Peter Greig, son of James Oreig, aged 2G. On the 19th inst., at Upper Clapton, Anna Maria, wife of 0. Soothee, Esq., aged 71. On the 20th inst., Eliza, wife of Thomas Dorking, Esq., of 15, Artillery-place west, Finsbury-square, aged 25. On the 18th inst., at Brompton-crescent, Joseph Moho'. son, Esq., aged 74. On the 17th inst., at Brighton, suddenly, Charles Kerrieu Sala, son of Madame Sala, aged 35. LONDON : Printed and Published by BITTED° YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, et 27t4 Sun 011ie., Na 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county cf Blitldlertex i Saturday, February 21, itbr.