The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-03-13 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE. OF LORDS.—YEsTERDAY.

The Royal assent was given by commission to several
bills.

A message was brought up from the Commons,
requesting a confeience for the purpose of acquainting
their lordships that that Rouse had agreed to an
address to the Crown on the subject of the Commercial
Treaty.

The conference having been held,
Lord TAUNTON gave notice that on Thursday he
should move that their lordships agree to an addreis
jointly with the House of Commons.
In reply to the Earl of Ellenborough,

The Duke of NEW6ARTLE said that the third article
of the treaty gave no poVer to the French Government
to raise differential duties• as against English ships..

The AdministratiOn of Poisons Bill, and the Dwell-
ings for Labouring Classes (Ireland) Bill passed through
committee.

The Medical Acts Amendment Bill was read a second
tithe.

The House adjourned at a quarter past six.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-YESTERDAY.

The Speaker took his seat'at four U'clock.
Mr. MAGUIRE asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland-
whether it is true that a troop of the 15th :Hussars.have
been sent to Castlebar, county Mayo, for the purpose of
aiding in the eviction of more than sixty tenants, repre-
senting •250 souls, from the property of Lord Plunkett,
tishOp of Tuam, at Partry, in that county, and whether
it has come to his knowledge that' the said evictions
have been the result of the refusal of the tenants (who are
exclusively Catholics) to permit their children to attend
schools established by Lord Plunkett, and which schools
are publicly stated to be anti-Catholic in their teaching.
Mr. CARDWELL said that he was sorry to say that
some such occurrence took place, but as to the motives
which actuated it he had no information.

Lord J. RUSSELL, in reply to Mr. Puller, said that it
was the intention of the French Governtumt to impose
an export duty on raga so soon as the prohibition shall
have been removed, but he could not state the amount.
Our Government were about to take ,steps to obtain the
removal of the prohibition affecting the export of rags
in other countries.

In reply to Mr. Thomas Duncombe,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Government had been
in correspondence with that of Naples, with the view of
inducing that Government to accept the reforms recom-
mended by England and France. The correspondence
he laid upon the table.
Lord MANNEtts asked the Foreign Secretary whether
he had received any further information as to the
intentions of the Emperor with regard to the annexa-
tion of Savoy, and whether be believed that such
annexation was still contemplated,
Lord J. RUSSELL stated that he expected to receive
a despatch from our ambassador at Paris on the subject
in a day or two. He would add his conviction that
the opinion of other'powers would have due weight
with the Emperor.
Some further discussion having arisen on the motion
respecting Savoy, which Mr. Kinglake had fixed for
the 19th, in'the course ofovhich .

Lord J. ByssEt.i. declined to p)stpone the second
-reading of the Befoul' Bill, whicl) stood for that day, so
as to give precedence to the Savoy question..
Mr..KTIIOI,AKE, upon this, complained of breach of
faith, as he had postponed his motion to suit the views
of the Government.

Lord J. RUSSELL denied that accusation. If any
party in the Rouse thought that it was the duty of the
Government to go tq war to prevent the annexation,
the proper course would he tq hang forward a deftnite
motion: Ile protested against the recurrence of these
irritating, useless discussions, as calculated to injure the
friendly relations between the two countries, and espe-
cially injurious to our own interests.

Mr. Disn4.44 declared that a discnssion upon the
subject was necessary, that it might been seen how far
the projects, of the Emperor had been-favoured by ber
Majesty's Government ; to him this conduct appeared
mysterious, and demanded explanation. ' .
Lord PAIIERSTON urged, as Lord John Russell had
done, the inconvenience and risk orthese angry and
personal discussions. It was in the power of any one
vino thought proper to propose a vote of censure on the
Government for Lila coupe they had Plirstted, The
Government would be quite ready to' meet such
motion. The view of those who demanded discussions
should be more clearly explained. Did they mean
to censure the French Emperor, or her Majesty's
Ministers ?
Sir J. PAKINGTON observed that it was not intended
to censure the Government, but surely the noble
viscount would not deny the propriety of demarriing
c4-Pl9iations on the subject. .

•• • •
Mr. Tioas4Art said th.q.t, the real ouestiqu was whether
the conduct of affairs was iu the bands of statesmen
qualified to deal with it. The foreign secretary bad
spoken as if there were two parties in the House—
one desirous of forwarding the annexation, the other
ready to go to war to prevent it. He wished to know
to which class her Majesty's Ministers belonged. Events
were marck!alf forward, and it was for the House to
decide whether a firm and vigorous expression of ophajon
on the part of the country would not do more for the
peace of Europe and the honour of England than any-
thing that could be done by a timid and vacillating
ministry.,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that no
doubt lfr. Iforsman had fears for the Government, as
his anxiety for tipis 81,4Mi14 aid success was well
known. As to Savoy, since a discussion was so earnestly
Joh
) t .• )
demanded, he was authorised by'Lord n Russell to
state that, on the morrow (this day), he.would, on lay-
ing papers on the subject Of Italy, take the opportunity
• ,
of niutkpig,a ,tateineilt ii.s.to the course the Ministers had
adopted. •
- - -

Mr. S. FurzqtuALu said that 4 discussion on Pie sub-
,
ject in that• Wipe would strengthen the hands of the.
Ministry, and he should be glad to be enabled so far to
judge their conduct as to give them his confidence and
support.
In reply to Mr. B. Cochrane,
Sir.G: GREY said that it was intended by Lord J.
Russell to make a statement respecting our affairs in
China on Friday ne4t, Ilord Elgin, although goirtg to
td Paris for a' few days, was not clout to leave the
Country permanently for some time to come:
On the motion for the second reading of the Paper
Duty. Bill,
Sir W. MILES opposed the motion as impolitic m the
penny to the income tax. ffe defended the piper tali a
elastic and easily collepted, and productive of no serious
inconvenience.. He argued that the abolition of the
duty would not make popular periodicals any cheaper.
lie moved, as an amendment, a resolution that in the
r :sent state of the revenue, and at the present moment,
the repeal of the duty was inexpedient.

STA qrE segotyled thg aniendtrie*,
kr. 'iT94,}lls stpporte the 01.
kr., A. DifiLts opposed it as ill-4'llrd. He reminded
Lord .1. Rtpsell of his own declaration that the tea
and sugar 4nties ought to be 'the first to be taken off.

supported the hill; as did
Air. Mkgrritt who said that the cheap, press,
already useful and creditable, would be still firther
improved.. Ireland was especially fitted for the manu-
facture of paper, and would greatly benefit by the
repeal of the duty.
Lord R. CEett opposed the bill, as the money to be
paid for the raw material of paper would find its
way to the foreigners, and beoanse the supply of, the
raw 1144terial itself was limited. Re considered the
present proposal as in every way a step in ;he wrong
dtreetion,

Mr. -M. gilisoN said that it should not be forgotten
that by the commercial treaty we admitted foreign
paper under the same duty as that actually levied by
the excise. The proposed relief might, therefore, be
fairly given to the home manufacture. The house had,
by rejecting the motion of Mr, Du Cane, affirmed the _.
principle of !tleFeqstil& tliQ hiconr favour of the
repeal of indirect taxation. The question then was
what portion of indirect taxation they were to select.
The paper tax was, he contended, the fittest under the
dire stauees. 4eschtiTis qf the floye, and rpm_
atiqf committees had repeatedly urged the
repeal of the
paper duty, which had long been con-
' demand as a source of ordinary revenue. The House
was not then asked suddenly to repeal the tax, bqt only
to prepare for it. The time waS now come, and
melid°4s
he demanded the support of those who had
formerly pronounced against the tax, amongst,
whom was Mr. Disraeli. The Commissioners
of Inland Revenue had themselves pronounced against
the tax, as involving great inconvenietres ill the collec-
tion, Was the resolution of the house--Tplaced solemnly
on their journals—to be always inoperative ? The
Government would have been highly to blame if they
had treated that resolution as a mere unmeaning para-
graph. If the greatest consideration had not been:
^ shown hitherto to the collection of the duty, the
0/104 occurrence. On the merits of the
most perplexing difficulties and disputes would have
consumption of paper
e cooteaded that the
bgegeenstioonf,
was'not oelmensgrate with our population, and our civil-,
sation. The United States, with 23,00,000 of inhabitants,
consumed three times as much as the United Kingdom
with 29,000,000. With regard to our export trade, he
showed that, the duty operated most injuriously on the
commerce of the country. The duty Am-0d
.4 a most
enormous per tentage in the coarse papers. As regarded
niaterial, England abounded in auxiliary material, and
the demand would greatly increase the supply of
rags. Ile considered the question, as an agricultural
one, declaring that the manufacture of paper Was the only
manufacture which could now be carried on with
success in the rural districts. Coming to the ta4 as one
on the circulation of IcOclirldge, `he
extrema weight with which it pi ssea upon cheap publi-
cations, and how grevious an impediment it was in the
way of their success—not only newspapers, but religious