The Express.
London, England, 1852-12-14 00:00:00

THE EXPREIN, TUESDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 14, 1852.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT
}HOUSE OF LORDS.—MosoAT, ilsc. 13.
The LOan took his at at lye o'clock.
I'ICTIT lONS PRESENTED.
Fllllll DISIIIIIIVTION or PAIILIAMINTAIIII PAPIIII.
By Luid STANLEY of A LDERLEY. frost • M. thanks'
Institute, and the Hail of SHAFTEsIWRY, from the Bath
Comuserti 4 and Literary lostitution, praying fora free die-
Wort', a of parliamentary pipers.
K rALAIAL —By the Earl of SHAFTESBURY,
from tha presbytery ut Edint %co, against the opening of
the Crystal reties on the Lord's day
NOTICE OF MOTION.
CONVOCATION.—IL• E.rl of sUAVTESBURY tare
notice that on the it-assembling of parliament after the
reads he should suoasit a motion es the subject of con-
notation.
WEST INDIA COLONIES LOANS ACT AMEND-
MENT BILL.
Oa motion of the E.irl of Dom/LT.oas bill was rend
• third time and µlased.
1011HO:id INCLOSURE BILL.
On the motion of L,rd CoLcurents, this bill was read
• third time sod passed.
Their lordship* thus adjourned.

HOUSE OF CONISIONS.—MoNDAT, DEC. 13.
Tht Sreehsa took the &us at • few minaret before
4 o'clock.

l' ET 1 [IONS PILESENTED.

Toe BUDOST AND littrlS Tax —Against the budget
and lee alteration of the house tart By Mr.
MASSEY, trout Neerpurt, Isle. of Wight; Lord D.
STUART, !lout the pasted of St. Proms; the Earl of
Id VLe IRA firma W . thy; Mr. HAYT ER, from Wells ;
Mr. OREN V I LLE BERKELEY, from Benham.
Tan Sonic or
A 11431101. iliSTllVlSS.—Prapioot that parliamentary paper.
imitate be tromudited to wieshaniee institutes: BMr.
FEROUSSON. mums Carlin..;
Mr. I'IIINN, from Bath;
Mr. • AIONSELL, from Limeade; Mr. COBDEN, from
Utley._ York:one; Mr. LOCEE. true Hoodoo ; Lord
BERNARD, fi..LO Cock; RICE, front Dover; Mr.
MOFFATT, from Newton, D. von.
Tatra ini KNOWLIDOS.- Praying for the removal of
the cusps vu new.pipere and 011 R-r tare* on knowledge:
By Sir W. CLAY and Mr. BUTLER, from the 'Power
Hamlet.; Mr. F. MACKENZIE, from Liverpool; Mr.
BAINEs, k.m Leeds; Mr MONSELL, from Limerick;
Mr. HUME, from Westmoister.
Tao BALLOL.—by Mr. O'CONNOR HENCHY, from
Kildare, coniplainiag of ' influence being exercised at
olectios.• in art prey ii.g (or the ballot as the only
remedy.
ROMAN CATOULIL CITZUV AT ELICTIONS.—By Mr.
BUTT, from Tamisha., complaining of the influence cart-
cited by the Roman catliode clergy at lc ctioas in Ireland.
Pima LAW tIDAILS.—Iiy Mr. 'T. DUNCOMBE, from
the Hollern Unies unmet the orders relating to out-door
relief MINNA i.y the Poor Law Board em 25th August.
CLAIM us, EX MILKS.% is CUANCIAT.—sIy Mr. T.
DI:NCO:RUE, nem Mr. It ed, of Islington, stating that
Sir. Dr, w, the Curie of the Lined:at rats, who had a 'Wary
of 1,201. V. a year, and whom s Site hours were from ten to
four, was atist a commiseio,er under the income tag ; he
coniplamed that the two utliee• were illegally held toge-
ther sad .iseompatibl.-. and prayed fee ea inTiary.
Buituvou or ILISTUICis ELeeeturt.—By Mr. PHINN,
irons eeriai the terser the borough of Hastings, complain.
Meg that the recositiaaneas into whisk they had entered to
muerte a petition spume the return Ka member for the
borough at the last ekeium were not received, and stating
that they were rowdy IJ cuter into fresh recogaisancts; sad
praying that the house Is veld colander the petition.
na litithe to leaLe.—Di Load D. STUART, from
a unitarien cusp -zration at kemlall, wapiti that some
steps should lie tak -a to iodate the satheirities of a certain
state an itity to emu from debuting the people from
reading the
Tat Casa or ELMS'S!, /11;11lAT.—II, Lord D.
STUART (3), from pieces in the metropolis • Mr. R.
CURRIE, from N-rtleumpton; Mr. WILKINSON, from
Lambeth; praying fur mimeo:ream is the cam of Edward
Murray.
Tote C Pueer--Ily Mr. lICIIE, from West.
minter; Er. LOCKHART, frum Edinburgh; in favour
K openiog the C., steel Palace, the British Mamas, and the
National Gallery, on Saudi's.
STANDI34O ORDERS.
Mr. W. rA fTEN rr.oved that standing orders Noe. 59,
a..d h. 6 be repealed, std that the Maiming orders be
made stanehug orders in Ina thereof That, excepting iu
the case of • railway bill, a sum nut less titan one twen-
tieth part el the dimmest nqaired Mbe subscribed shall,
preriensely t. the 13th de) of Jemmy be deposited with
the Court of Chancery is England, if ;he work is intended
le be tiO.if Euglaol; az sub the Court of Chancery in
Eagles-I, or with the Court of Euliouser in Scotland, if
mak work is intended to be dose is &Mimi ; and with
the Coast of ry in Ireland, if mach work is intended
M be dime in behind. That, Mae case of railway bills, a
sem sat km than, one-tenth part of the unmet required to
be salweribed shah, preciously to the 13th day of January,
be deposited with the. Court ef. Obasteg In England, if
the railway is intended to be made in Eagland ; or with
the Court of C:Tancery in England or the Court of Each,.
quer in ltwellanil, if such railway is intended to he made in
Seollited ; and with the Court of Chancery in Ireland, if
such radwee a in.eneled to lie made in Ireland. That
all petunia. praying that my of the occasional or standing
olden of the bons. relating to private bills,
may be dispensed with, sad all petitions for the re insertion
K petitions for prime bills in the general list of petition',
and all petitions opposing the same, be presented to this
hoax 19 &petting the same in the Private Bill-016c, ; and
every stela ,wtition so deposited shall stand referred to the
melee committee on standing orders.
Agrred t...
THE CASE OF MR. BENJAMIN BOYD.
Mr. M. MILNES begged to ask the Under-Secre-
tary of State for Foreign Affeire whether any steps have
hem taken by the intervention of his department with torsi,"
government* to ascertain the fate of Mr. Benjamin Boyd,
supposed to have been murdered or held in captivity, cm
leu.diog at one of the Solomon Islands in the latter put of
the last year, sad whether there will be any ONOCtiOft to
lay such isfurmmion as Ler Majesty's government may
ham received on the table of the home.
Lord STANLEY said be was unable to lay any informs-
tin as the table on this subject, as none had been received;
bet he might my that in lithe last a despatch had born
written to Mr. Campton, the minister of this country in
the United States, directing him to ask for the co operation
.1 the American government in obtaining information with
record to the fate of Mr. Boyd. The Secretary of State of
the American government hid complied with that request.
sad a notice had been published by the American govern-
Mind is the newspapers, requesting that gay private indi-
vidual who might obtain any informatiosi with regard to the
fate of Mr. Boyd would conemsneate it to the government.
He wee sorry to say that up to the present moment no ia.
denageioa ...vetiver had been Itellin•lff.
GENERAL SCREW STEAM COMPANY.
Mr. RICH moved fur copies of the reports of the gar-
upon and engineers appointed by the Admiralty to isopeet
mad report upon the ships employed by the General Screw
Steam Company to carry the mails to Calcutta ; and also
%pm these employed by the Australian Steam Navigation
Company to carry the mails to Australia, stating-1. The
tesaageof these ships; 2. Their hone power; 3. The ave-
rage speed with and against tide; 4. The speed required by
their respective contracts ; 5. The armament they are re.
riled to carry in cam of need; 8. Their general dimm-
able&

470,11t0.
THE INCOME TAX.
Mr. HEADLAM begged to put a question to the Chan-
cellor of the Esehtquer with reference to the mode in
which he propmed to levy the new inecene-taz. It was
M"sedto briag this tar down go ea to include incomes
realiard property of 4504. a year and industrial prelim
of 12W. • year. Now, as • penes having 401. • year from
realised property and 801. • year frau, industrial profits
would be eaimpt under each of those heads, he begged to
ash whether, in the CAN of • person who might have two
Incomes of 40'. mid 801. derived respectively from realised
property and industrial profits, um tan would be levied on
the eggregate ii.eome 0(1201. a year?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rid it w.s
extremely inconvenient to h..ve questions put relating to
the details at measurer, lit the answers given to such
questions would perpetually lead to raimpprehension.
(Hear, hear.) Ile ooulu enter at the biting time on the
qsastlone of them el...taih, and he thought he ought not to
be 'ailed on to give answers to questions which could not
be satielacory—*ben it was WWI to allow a minister to
ester Into the detail. of • memo's when they were about to'
be bernight hef,re the house.
CLEROY ItI.6ERVES, CANADA.
Mr. 3. 8811 T II asked whither the additional papers re-
lating to Canada reserves, which had been received since
February, 18)2, would be laid on the table before the
realm

Sir J PAK INOTON said the papers were very few in
another, anii were now nasty ; bet he 'wished to add to
them a despatch which ho was about to send out before lay-
thg ;MIS OS the table
ACCIDENTS OH RAILWAYS.
Mr. H. BROWN begged to ask the President of the
!bard of Tree, whether it in the intention of the son Fn.
meet to propo e any armors tie one elPetually enforcing
the due sad I oecual obsereasee of efficient regulations ou
railways to I. rare the public safety ?
Mr. HENLEY said that the subject had been referred
to a select examinee, and tad that committee had made a
report the p .r. rament had au iatentioa of interfering with
the e,ishsg lain.
Mr. 11. BROWN said that he would then give notice
that, ou en early day after the now, be would call the
attewirm of the hones tu the ion of life which had arisen
from the 41• f. cues regulatioss of railways, and the seen•
oily of gone ioterfereaee us the pert of the government in
order that each emulations might be made as wield tend to
insure the public safety.
PROBATE OF WILLS IN LOCAL COURTS.
Is sower in Mr. HATIMILD,
Mr. WALPOLE said tbas a eery of the report of the
Oommimios relstang to the pr. of wills wield nee by
laid on the table. his there ought, is the ens
of uncooteced probate', to greater facilities for proving
wills by wain of Irml theme, _ _

1111THFIALD MARKET.
Ms. FORSTER begged to laquire of the &entity of
State for the 11.ane tavyarment what is doing towards the
vorovol of Smithavld market?
Mr. W A Ll'ol E us,d rvst the City of Laudon had the
. , isle 4111111101111101111111 M of Maytag to tl.e Secret
of 1344.. 14( teso Jausio Deerriallat within a even time
. toodiaevs to construct a new market in Owe of Smith-
2L. cio haa prix: bok itotise is the lest simmer

that they were prepared to construed a new market, had
that they had shown a site in Cepembagan.fields, and his
approbation had been given to that aim; but, until Om
the lap•eof 18 months from that time, he had no power So
interfere in the mode in which the City proposed to entry
out their plea.
Sir J. DUKE said he did not know if he wee doing
wrong in rising to give the Anus. information on the sub-
ject. (Cries of "Order," and the hon. gentleman eat down )
EXECUTION OF CAPTURED KAFFIRS.
. . .

Mr. HINDLEY gave notice that Ise would to-morrow
(this day) ask a question of the Secretary for the Colonies
with refereace to a stet. meat which had appear. d in the
Cape papers, that a number of KaMrs who had been taken
prisoners at Waterkloof had been hung; and if it was true
whether such an act was according to the usages of war.
SMITHFIELD MARKET.
Sir W. CLAY begged to ask his hon. friend the member
for the City of L.uuen (Sir J. flake) what proceedings had
taken place with reference to Use removal of Smithfield
Market. (Order.)
Bir J. DUKE was anxious to state—(Order).
The SPEAKER said the boa. members were not In
order. The tide of the house with regard to questions was,
that an individual member might be asked and answer a
question relating to any bill he had under his charge, and
that questions might be put to minis:era, tad answered,
relating to the ochry of the country.
Mr. T. DUNCOMDE begged to ask a question, and be
hoped he should not be so disorderly as the two baronets.
(A laugh.) Ile wished to mk the right hcii. genth man
the Secretary for the Home Department, to what place he
had given his sanction for the removal of Smithfield M.irket.
Mr. WALPOLE sad that he had already stated that the
site chosen was Copenhagen Field-, and lie believed that
the City of London were taking active steps to carry their
plans into execution.

port Of the oug. but for polies Moss ler highway rates, for
lighting, and fee gray descrigthes elielaspost ; sad bear in
mind that inequality of the pressure of ties rating
whlab I alluded too befonp—end that the smaller
number of yenta pumbase the this house pr ,party is rated
at, presets with equal severity oa the owners of that pro.
petty In assessing it for the legal rates as in the ease of the
property and the house tax. (Ileac, hear.) Not only
therefore has this property higher general taxes to pay—
proportionally—hut it has higher taxes to pay for local
purposes And you cannot expect a system of direct taxa-
tion which would work like this could ever be carried out.
What is this hods tax to be laid fir? For the purpose of
removing one half of the malt tax. That is the avowed
°hp ct, according to the right hon.geatleman, the Chancellor
of the Doehy of Lancaster (Mr. Christopher), who in this
matter has spoken with his usual frankness. But the
Chancellor of the Exchequer told us that this was a prole,-
sitinn in the interest of the consumer. (Laughter, and cries
of " No, no!") W,ll, which are we to believe? I certainly
think the government would do well to come to some un-
derstanding oa the point ; or, at least, if they cannot
agree that one or the other section of them should
engage to be silent. (Laughter.) My Idea of the
malt tax is precisely that of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer; that it is • tax paid by the consumer. But,
undoubtedly, as with all taxes laid on • commodity we pro-
duce, the producer is subjected to inconvenience end to
loss by it. The illustration which the right hon gentleman
gave is precisely analogous The cotton printer, protested
against the 3ed. per square yard duty on printed cottons,
because that duty tended to hereon them in their business.
In this cue of • remission of one-half of the malt tax, the
producer would benefit first, and the producer only compa-
ratively to • very small extent in the end. But I have
always understood that the great grievance was an excise
tax. (Hear, hear.) That does not affect the farmer, it is
true, directly ; hat indirectly it doer, and it is that effect
on which I w..uld base the claims of the farmers to the re-
peal of the malt tax. It was a farmer—e model farmer,
as all his neighbours will allow, and who from the very be.
ginning of our agitation was a free trader—l mean Mr.
Latimore, of Wheathanistead—who first converted me to the
notion of the importance to the farmer of • repeal
of tee malt tax. lie said that the farmers would gain
immensely by being enabled to feed their cattle with molt.
(Hear, hear.) I have accordingly publicly said that if you
could get a surplus large enough to permit you to do with-
out the whole of the malt tax, I would be an advocate of its
total remission. But I have always said this too—that I
would never be a party to any substitute for the malt tax.
I don't know that you could point out to me any tax, how-
ever little objectionoble in its form, which I would Dubai.
tuts instead of the malt tax. And 1 sll3 not less strongly
oppowel to removing only one-half of the malt tax. I voted
some two years ago against the proposition of thst
kind of my hon. friend the member for Derby (Mr. Bass.)
My objection to the remission of une-half the malt tax is on
principle : I won't agree to halve en excise tax, especially
the malt tax. (Hear, hear.) I ob.ect, independent
of my objection to the way in which you propose
to make up the deficiency. As the right hon. gentle-
man (Mr. Disraeli) has put the case—as tho case merely
of the consumers—it is open to objections of a serious
kind. The right hon. gentleman says that beer, like
bread, is a primary necessary of life ; end that idea has
been complacently repeated by all the hon. gentlemen
who have spoken on that side a:nce—that it is a necessary
of life, Indispensable to the health and strength of the
labourer. Now, I think there is a wide difference of
opinion on that subject, and I have repeatedly said in this
house that the greet difficulty you have to meet in dealing
with the malt tax is, that there is a large, a growing, and
an influential body in this country—some of them v-ry
fanatical, too—who hold the opinion that beer is not only
not a necessary of life, but that it is • very pernicious be-
verage to the individual, indulgence in whLh leads to the
infliction of urines evils on the community. (Laughter.)
You think they are wrong, no doubt ; but you have to
deal with that class, which Is a numerous and a highly
awful one among our constituents; and I think
that wrong or right, they are entitled to be heard ,
in this house. Such being the ease, I don't think you have
the least chance whatever of pawing a house tax. (Hear,
hear.) I don't know what a present majority of this bowie
may do; but I can tell you you can't maintain that tax if
you do pass it. (Cheers.) You have seen lately with the
window tax how lug lived is an agitation agiinst an unjust
impost; end, depend upon it, you are embarking in a con-
test out of which for
will come as disastroudy asyou did
out of the battle for protection—with this differecee, that
you will be fee more easily beaten. (Cheers and laughter.)
And what is more—you are going to fight a battle not
worth fighting for. (Cheers.) I can't termed this as an
attempt at compensation. I didn't want to allude a'
the thing—(Laughter) ; but the statement of the
Cheapener of the Duchy of Lancashire didn't leave
me • chance of passing it over—(taughter), mid I've been
obliged in some respect to deal with it in that manner.
There is another proposal in connexion with this subject,
in regard to which I think the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer has really quite wrecked his character as a financier ;
and that is the proposal to remit one half of the hop
duties. (Hear, hear) I have often had eummueications
with the growers of hops in Sussex, who have represented
that they wanted the whole duty off, but have expressed
apprehensions in consequence of the Kent hojegrowers ad-
vocating only • removal of half the duty ; and I have eon.
fated them in this way, " Don't alarm yourself fur a mo-
ment ; for after the great doings of Peel we shall never
have a half-aud.half Chancellor of the Exchequer making
two bites at a cherry." (Laughter.) Here is a most ex-
ceptional tax—the only tax you have collected in the fields
and garden. of the country—worthy, no doubt,
of Persia, or of Turkey—but too ridiculous for
this England of 1852. (Hear, bear.) If no one else
will make the motion, I will undertake to propose
the total repeal of the hop duties ; and even should that not
be carried. I will still vote against the repeal of only one•
hall the tax; fur, it is far better to keep it as it is, if we
cannot get it done away with altogether. (Cheers.) With
regard to the proposed modification of the income tee, I am
bound to give the government every credit for the way in
which they have dealt with that question. But in dealing
with this question, the old curse of the party was on the
right. hoc. gentleman, and he couldn't deal fairly with it ;
he was obliged to make a miserable paltry attempt to get a
specie! benefit for the tenant farmer. Instead e charging
the farmer on one-half of his rent, you propene to re-
duce it to one-third. In the time of Pitt the farmer patd
on three-fourths ; Sir Robert Peel reduced the three.
fourths to an estimate on one-halt of the rent ; and now it
was asked to go down to one-third. Now, sir, I
dicinot expect that on this occasion we should have
had these old grievance* revived. The Chancellor
of the Exchequer bad thrown over local burdens,
and we were to bear no more shout exclusive taxa-
tion of that kind. I thought that we were going to get
rid of this fermisg interest altogether; but it seems
to me that hon. gentlemen have not understood
what free trade b. They have confounded two
subjects which are not the time, the queetion of
protective duties and the question of direct taxation.
Now will they excuse ine if I give them • little A, B, C on
this matter. I see the bon. member for Cambridgeshire
here. He has not been accustomed to bear free trade spoken
of. I want to show him and other bon. gentlemen what it
is we have been doing. The advocates of free trade have
not been necessarily the advocates of direct taxation. Direct
taxation is • distinct question. We have been opposed to
protective duties, and we have said give us freedom of ex-
eking* with other countries, do away with those restrictions
on our commerce, and we du not inquire what the effect of
that freedom will be en price. All that we want
is to have free assess to as great a quantity of
these good things as we an get. Now one word
with regard to the tea duties (so we understood the
bon. member, bat he now spoke with his back to the gal-
lery, rendering it extremely difficult to ceich hie meaning).
I think if I had been Chancellor of the Exchequer I should
have done the same thing. The right hon. gentleman is
not far wrong in that measure, but I do not like his budget
at all. I believe that at the last moment it was cut down
and swopped away, until at last—u in the Queen's speech,
when somebody suggested that an " if " should be put in
that all parties might be accommodated, in thiscase some
one suggested one thing and some another—until at
last it did not at all come up to what was e :petted.
It was not worthy of a flee hours' speech. I humely
conceive I could have dame it in an hour and 20 minutes
speech. ("Oh!" and a laugh.) But the right hon.'
gentleman I suppose has does his but. And now with re-
goril to this controversy as to the direct taxes. I have long
foreseen that this would be discussed. I have never said
the taxes would not be paid. I have always had an opinion
of the people of England that they would pay their just
debts nader any circumstances; Tut I have alw.ys sai
this,—if you come to get IMMO of the taxes from the people
in the way of direct taxes they would tome to scrutinies the
expenditure more closely, and I think so still. When we I
come to have what the Chancellor of the Exchequer has
promised us, the whole of our accounts of the taxation
brought into a balance-sheet, we shall find that our ex-
penditure is approaching to 60,000,000 f., including the
cost of collection ; that is, about as much as the annual in-
come from real property in England, and pretty nearly
as much as the trades and professions make.
You will find that the great body of the people will
be galled with the yoke, and that there will be pressure
against some particular tax. Take the paper duties. Then,
1 have been in this biome a gentleman has shown me an
American nevestiaper, printed on paper made out of straw,
at an exceedingly low pries.—[The price, se compared with
teat made from rail in England, we understood the hon.
getoleinsan to say, to be as I to 11, in consequence of the
greater price of the rags, and also in consequenos of the
tat.]—And not only so, hut I have been told by a paper
manufacturer, that but for the excise regulations we could
have this straw paper manufactured in England. Then,
besides paper there is the tee on snap. Whit an abomina-
ble tax is that. Only conceive of an agitation against the
excise duty on wisp. 'Why, the supporters of the tax would
have it and of them that they were the advocates of
dirt. Then take the insurance duties. For an insurance from
ors to the amount of 100'., you pay Is. gal. for the risk,
and government makes you pay 3.. for the duty. ' (Hoar,
hear.) I will not go over the rest, but their name id legion.
Hat as they are discussed, you will feel more and more the
necessity of resorting to mine other mode of texathoo It to
not merely that you arc competing, hut the change in the
habits of herniae*. renders these obstructions impossible.
The greater velocity of business will render them Impossi-
ble. Link at your customs regulations; there has been an
incitation ohout them, end you cannot see the end of the
difficulty except by abolishing cu.toni-houses altogether.
If you get rid .if erotectiar, make up your mind that you
will have to get rid of a great moray of these duties, and
you will have to increase your direct tuatina ; and when
you do that, defend upon it you must mike
up your minds to come to a lair end honest
system of direct taxation. Now you must tome to it
honestly. It is of no 'use attempting to do otherwise.
There is too much intelligence in these days for any party

sontleese to more than its fair share of taxation. And
then whoa you have done that, Ire us sin if we are sot ear-
' ryiag on a most foolish system of expenditure. Bare we
are adopting a system of free trait., anal yet we are emend•
lag our colonial empire, all to be maiutainea and paid for
out of tee taxes of this country. That might have been
all very wise and proper for statesmen a hundred yearn
ago. At that time Adam Smith Mid net written on the
laws of Political Economy; sod when he did write, he said
he dial nut suppose we should arrive at a time when pro
tective duties would be abolished. We have arrived at
those days, but they have totally changedthe aspect" of your
policy with regard to your colonial empire, and you ought to
make up your minds to that chew. Our colonies must
maintain their own establishments. We cannot keep
armies in Canada and elsewhr re—we Cannot afford it. And,
besides, if there be high taxation here, the people will run
away from it. Twenty.five years hence there will be re-
moved nut only many of the physical, but other obstacle'',
in the way of emigration. Remember, that the people arc
not now going into exile when Spy emigrate. They have
all got relatives er friends in America and Australis, and
they go there as on a v sit ; but can you suppose, if you
allow mismanagement to go on here, that the people will
not he eager to go the re to escape the effects of your taxa-
tion ? That has bran the effect °teammates taxation every-
where. The right lion gentleman spoke about emigration
promoting the prosperity of the country. That is a question of
degree. It may he that those who have gone may have given
more elbow room to theee:who are left behind, but that ar-
gument would not apply if you rook half of our population
away. We have wasted a great deal of money, and our ex-
penditure is much too large, but it is of no use my saying
le because ynu call me a quaker if I do. (A laugh.) 'You
ham added 1,200,0001. to your expenditure lately, and
while we have this large amount of expenditure let no man
is this country expect to escape from taxation. I will not
Itadertake to exempt the 10f. householders from taxation to
meet the expenses of our estsblishments if they send tie to
thin house members to vote an increase of that establish-
ment. Already we me spending 16 millions iss the expenses
of our establiehmente Then let the middle clam make up
their minds that they must pay for this Ima dealiug
with this question of taxation, because you are proposing
to levy an additional house tax; show me that you hive
an expenditure arising from a pressure out of doors, and I
might think there was some reason for it ; but that is quite
a different thing from what it is when you propose to create
a deficit by reducing the tax on malt. (Hear, hear.) I
say there is no tax I will vote for, I know of no tax that
I would vote fur, in substitution of the malt tax. It is only
M the ease of a auttleient surplus that I would vote for the
redaction nr the abolition of the malt tax, an 1 that not be-
lag the ease I cannot rate for tho reduction now proposed.
Lord J. MANNERS said, if the hon. gentleman who
had lust eat down had made nothing else plain, he had
made it plain that he did not wish fur unrestricted comps,.
Lion, but he was in favour of that one-sided system of
legislation, which was MOTS properly termed free imports.
But if he had made this plain, he could not compliment
him on baring redeemed hie promise to instruct the hon.
member for Cambridgeshire in what he was pleased to call
the A, B, C, of Niftiest science. The hon. gentleman told'
them there was no °memory connexion between the sys-
tem of direct taxation and that of free imports, and he
then, towards the close of his speech, entered into an
elaborate argument to show them that If they touched the
customs' duties .t all, they would inevitably brim them to
a system of direct taxation. Ile would let the hon. gentle-
man anew( r his own A, B, C. Well, having got the Pane.
Lion of the hen. gentleman in the concluding, if not in the
beginning, part of his speech to this system of direct
taxation, which at one moment he defended, and at another
said had no nece.sary connection with free trade,'
let them see how he proposed to carry it our.
But the hen. gentleman, following the right hen. member
for Halifax (Sir Charles Wood) said that the government
proposal would set class agaMst class, and country against
town, and, as figures were never wanting to prove any-
thing, so, in thisinstance, he quoted figures to make out some
show for his proposition; but it must have struck the house'
that in the catalogue the hon. gentleman gave of these'
items of taxation, which he said would swell the tax on
houses to 21 per cent. against 3 per cent. on land, he had
omitted all referenoe whatever to the land tax, and those
other taxes which pressed especially on the land. The
hose gentlemau talked of Belgrave-square, and the advan-
tage that the great lords of the soil would derive from their
Ca&rents, which would be free from the new impost;
l: forgot to state that as the revenant of these gentlemen
blamed so would their essesement to the income-tax in.
Mass, and diminish their exorbitant receipt,. (Hear,
bar.) The hon. gentleman alluded two or three times to
ma Incise impost—the sow duty. Now, his argument on
Oat point was a little hazy and uncertain, and he (the
noble lord) was net altogether surprised that it should be
so; for though the hon. gratieesan appeared to admit that
the soap dtey was to the master manufacturer very much
what the malt tax was to the farmer, he did not tell them
that the master manufacturer* enjoyed, and had done so for

years, a drawback upon all the 'tali teed in hit manufac-
tor), while the farmer enjoyed no similar drawback oa the
malt which he consumed, and which, according to the tele
thereto, of the hen. gentleman himself, he might &dean-
tageeosly use in increasing the potduction of hie farm.
(Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman admitted that the claim
of the former to the repeal or diminution of this tax was
undeniable, in point ('(justice, fiscal science, or the prin-
ciples of free trade ; hut, though ho toll the landed gentle-
men in that house, as he had often told the firmer, out of
that house, when it h suited his purpose to do sO, that
they would always find in him the most strenuous opponent '
of the impost, it seemed that whenever he gave that as-
surance it was coupled—at least in his own mind—with the
determination never to conscut to its repeal so long as any
other tax must be imposed to make up the deficiency caused
by its abolition. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman, in
short, gave them to understand that he would vote for the
repeal of the malt tax at the Greek Kalends, and not before.
The great mass of the people who had tasted the tocnefim
arising from the repeal of excise duties would know well
that thera was not a labauring man, whether he was the
inhabitant of the town or a tiller of the soil, who would
not derive some very appreciable benefit from this mea
sure. (Hear, hear.) The remission of half the malt tau
could not hut increase the consumption of that fine old
English beverage which, in spite of the denunciations of
the hon. gentleman n, posits', was a beverage which would
be dear to the working classes so long as they had to en-
dure labour and toil to procure the means of their dal y
subsistence. (Cheers.) It was well, indeed, for the hon.
gentleman to read them a protest by a number of learned
gentlemen against the use of what they termed alcoho'ic
beverages; but he would ask the hon. member whether ho
believed in his conscience that any one of those eminent
medical gentlemen, for all he had signed his name to the
document, would think it necessary to abstain, even for a
single day, from the use of intoxicating liquor'?
(Cheers.) But the honourable gentleman, who was
bound to obtain for the farmers, in accordance with
the principles of unrestricted competition, the remission
of tt e malt tax, now entertained grave doubts how far he
should be justified es a moral titan in voting for a measure
that might increase the consumption of beer. It seemed
that the hon. gentleman had Giles into the old fallacy
which hail s often been combatted by the hon. member for
Montrose, and was prepared to make men strong, healthy,
end moral, not by a simple act of parliament, hat by the
maintenance of an outrageous ditty. (Loud cheers.)
After the speeches of the right honourable baronet
and of the honourable gentleman who had just sat
down, the committee would come to the conclusion
that in the opinion of the eminent leaders of the " free
importers" opposite, the system which heretofore they had
laid down as the necessary and just corollary of their
favourite prim iplo was ode that would not scan,' the test of
a single day's experience. (Hear, hear.) The right hon.
baronet, in terms almost prophetic, had declared tied
direct taxation could only be made tolerable by
being placed on so small a portion of the com-
munity that the great mamas should go untouched by
it; hut a system founded on such enormous exemptions
had not even the merit of novelty—the absence of which
both hon. gentlemen had so regretted in the budget of the
governor. in. That system was at least as old as the days of
Bold Robin Hood, when he robbed the Bishop of Here-
ford of his gold in the merry glades of Sherwood. and was
thus able to reduce the misery of the poor in that neigh-
bourhood. (Laughter.) In the opinion of the right hoe.
gentleman a budget ought to be foonded upon a system
which pressed unfairly upon the teade, nrefesaions, and
science of the country, and upon a tax which was levi don
the smallest number of houses possible. (Hear hear.) If
the right hon. gentleman should ever regain that place—
which, without offence to him. he must say he hod ferfeited
to the universal satisfaction of the taxpayers of this country
—the favourite weapon in his armoury would be to main-
tain la all its inc-plenty the income tax; an 4 the next
arm on which be would most depend would he that
tax which, they had the testimony of the hon.
gentlemen opposite, was moot opposed to science,
nod interfered most w ith the industry of the produce,. The
right hon. gentleman would give the country no relief be-
yond dealing with the tea duties, and the remitting
loo,oont. which it was proposed to give to the shipping
interest. Beyond this he would return to race, his mind
unmoved, and his views unchanged as to those principles
of that direct taxation whieh the hon. members for Montrose
and the West Riding had told them were unjust and in-
equitable, and which must at no distant period be changed
by some Chancellor of tho Exchequ. r. so as to be more
consistent with fairness and justice,. (Cheers.) The prin-
ciple, however, which united the het rageneous parties
opposite alainet the government (and it was right that the
country shnuld know this) was really to maintain in all
their iojustice awl want of equity the present finuncill•
arrangements of the income and property tax. (Loud
cheers.)
A great number of hon. gentlemen on both sides of the
house then rose amidst some laurhter ; but they all give '
way except Mr. Rich and Mr. Lowe, who bed more ties
ones caused some amusement by rising at various pauses
In the noble lord's speech. Eventually
Mr. RICH obtained possession of shallow. He assured
the committee that he would not have persevered in at-
tempting to speak, had it not been a personal matter upon
which he wished to make a few ohaervatiens. He had
been int mined the the hon. baronet, the member for the
University o' Oxford. had during his (Mr. Rich's) sinner
from theta ,use been induced, no d.tubt unintentionally, to In-
dulge in come remarks re:trire to himself, whieh he re
lorded as very unproovokeol. Ile (Id?. Rich) hid made
some observations upon the meaner in which the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer prim ed to deal with the
clergy ; and 'be 'inn. baronet ha I slid, that if "mint cted to
en exeminati.in before such a committee of examiners as
the hon. nomhe.• for Dumfries hal pro; ,stel f attache., h •
(Mr. Rich) would. umtoulitedly, have been plucked (A
laugh.) Now, if o foefenap wee thrown clout], be hoped'
ho should be allowed to show that it would fit hiM. "(The
honourable gentleman then proeeNleil to vote the
passage from the Chancellor of the Exchequer's speech
upon the budget, to which he had referred.)

That statement appeared to him to involve three proposi-
tion•—fint, that it was expedient to remove all hen, ficed
clergymen whom incomes were below 1001. a year from
schedule B; secondly, that the assessment of the clergy in
general under the higher schedule was unfair and unjust;
and, thirdly, that the proposed relaxation would eause a
lees to the revenue of 30,000/. a year. On reference to a
gymen having incomes of between 501. and 1001. • year.
return of 1834, he found that there were then 1,619 der-
Calculating these on an average of 74. a year, and do-
due t'ng 74 in the pound, he found the remission of taxa-
tion under this head would be 3,5001. in round numbers.
I Compiling this with the Chancellor's etetement„ there re-
mained • lose unaccounted for of 265001. There were
10,400 beneficed clergymen, including bishops, deans, and
I Canoe*, whose total income, according to the return,
I amounted to upwards of 3,600,000/. Deducting from this
the incomes under 1001., and adding something for incomes
not included in the rtturn, for new endowments and the
improve rent of property, and also remembering that the
incomes of the bishops and prebends had been nearly all
•ivierstet. el, the ue of the clergy above 1001. is year
might fairly be taken at 3,800,0001. The loss on that
ammtit, by reducing the tat from 7tl to 51,1 , would
enviunt to • little over 26,0001., which added to the 3,400/.,
the lose oa income', below 1001., just mode the 30,0001. Ile
was, therefore, at a loss to conceive why the right hon. ba-
ronet (Sir R. Inglis) thought his statement se inaccurate.
But how did the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself ac-
count fir this estimated loss ? Ile had said distinctly that
he should relieve the clergy under 1001.' and trait4cr the
rest to schedule D. How otherwise did he account fir the
20,0301. ? If it could not he accounted for, let it be trans
lured to the estimwed surplus, which would be small
enough. It was said 400,0001. would arise from repsytnents
to the Loan Commission. These loans had been in opera.
tion fur the last 35 years, with great advantage, for the pro-
metion of drainage, railways, emigration, and other
matters. Ss carefully had these operations been conducted,
that, instead of a loss, there had been a gain of about •
million of money. Nevertheless the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer said he would abolish the system, though the de-
mand for such loans was as great as ever in Ireland. But
there was still a balance of 2,700,000/. of unpaid loans; and
the Chancellor of the Exchequer propelled to apply these I
sums, as they fell in, to the service of the year. These
sums had hitherto been applied in reduction or the
debt; and regulations had been made ti revent their
being applied to the service of the year. Mr. Ono'bum,
when Chancellor of the Exchequer, had brought in a hilt to
that iffect. This was a serious principle, and env which
the house would do well to e insider before assenting to the
proposed application of the 400.0001. The surplus was esti.
mated at 1,300,0001., and that them might be • saving of
210,0001. from the Kaffir war; adding toe 400,1130/. from
the repayment of loans, and half-a-million from the pro.
posed increase of the house tax, he made out a surplus of
two millions and a half. Then, allowing fee the lose on the
malt end hop duties, light dues, and other matters, lie
made a total loss of 2,100,000!., having the narrow surplus
of 400.000!., precisely the amount to be derived fern the
repayment of loans, and which ought to go in liquidation of
the debt. Should the house reject the proposal as to the
application of these advances, the surplus would be extin-
guished. and should the K fir war again blaze out the anti-
cipated saving of a gunner of a million would not be
realised, and the estimated surplus would be converted into
• deficiency. The object of all this wan the reduction of
the malt tar, and whom would it benefit ? (Hese, hear. )
Sir Lytton Bulwer had ealcalated that there would be a re.
mission of a penny a pot on strong beer. lie (Mr. Rich)
had inquired of his friend Mr. Bass as to the quantity of
gallons produced from a quarter of malt, and the quantity
of malt brewed in a year, end he found that 580 millions of
gallons of beer were produced in a year. On this calcula-
tion the remission of tax was equal to little more than a
penny a gallon. Supposing that the consumers got all the
benefit of the reduction it would be, not a penny a pot, but
a penny a gallon on steers beer; while on the beer con-
sumed by the poor the saving would be less than a farthing
pot. The remiasioa would not be so much a benefit to the
pour as to the more wealthy classes. (Hier, hear.) But it
was said the remission of one half was nothing; the whole
duty must come off to do any good. If the house was pre-
pared to double the house tax now, they might depend they
would have to double it again next year to meet the views
of the government. And why? Merely to fulfil expecta-
tions that had been most wantonly raised, and never could
be realised. (Hear.) It was notorious that the malt tot
was now very cheaply collected, since the late improvement
in the excise, and there was no pretence fur meddling
with it. If the proposal of the government were carried
out, it would make direct taxation so odious that the public
would be anxious to revert to import duties. It should be
remembered that on all articles of consumption the poor
paid higher in comparison than the rich. On tea, for in-
stance, they paid 200 or 300 per ce .t. on the cheaper aorta ;
while the rich did not pay a quarter so high a per tentage.
Hence the necessity for an ad valorem duty. It had bees
speciously urged, in support of the new hues duty, that
taxation ought to be coincident with representation, unit
therefore houses ought to be taxed down to 101. If this
were done, it would have a very large disfranchising effect.
Many men would be rated at 9/. only, to avoid the tax ;
while others would be diefranchieed for nonpaymeet of the
tax. Ile did not deny that this tax had many things to
recommend it. Under some circumstances it might be a
better measure of the ability to pay than the lucerne tax
itself ; but looking at the great temptation to fraud and
svasioo, and the measures which would be necessary to
counteract this, it was to be feared a strong feeling would
be excited against the tax. If these objections applied to the
house tax, they applied with double force to the income tax.
The proposition kr taxing funded property and salaries in
Ireland and allowing the land of Ireland to escape, and teat
for altering the assessment in favour of the farming clue in
this country, were in particular unfair and unjust. As far
as human foresight could speculate, it was probable, if not
quite ceitain, that in the next ten years prices in this
country would rise to double their present amount, owing
to the influx of gold from Australia, California, and perhaps
other yet undiscovered sources. The recipients of salaries '
would be the great sufferers by this rise in prices, and yet
these were the persons whom the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer selected for the imposition of an income tax. The
right hon. gentleman exempted the landed property of Ire-
land because it was burdened with a poor law. He admitted
that Ireland paned through • severe ordeal, and that
might be a reason for exempting her altogether from on
income tax. But it was mote whatever for making a dis-
tinction between salaries sod landed property. Still more
unjust was it to draw a distinction in favour of the hind of
Ireland, as compared with the funds, which stood upon the
public credit and national faith. Then with regard to the
farming class, whilst every tradesman and artisan with I
incomes between 1001. aad 1501. were brought under
the operation of the income tau, not one additional
farmer would be touched, whilst the duty was to he
lowered, for those who came under its operation, from one-
half toone-third of their moll s. But the pecuniary com-
pensation which was intended to he given by the proposi-
tion of the right hon. gentleman to the agricultural interest,
would fall into the hands of the landlords, and not those of
the ferment. He objected to this budget because it was
one-sided, because it gave compensation where none was I
due, and because it was penal in its effects. It threw the
main burden of taxation on hr towns; it was penal in its
operation on thou who rented houses hetween 101. and'
201. wear—the class of persons by whom free trade was
carri. (Hear, hear.) It vas d ingcrous and unjust, and
be might almost say dishonest, and upon these grounds he
would give • most willing vcee against it. It unsettled
from 6,000,000/. to 6,000,0001. of malt tax ; from 5,000,000/.
to 6,000,0001. of income tax ; from 1,000,01.101. to 2,000,0001.
of house tax ; and all this was done for no other purpose
than to fulfil a vain expectation which was recklessly held
out to a pattieular interest. (Hear, hear.)
Sir It. INGLIS said that the hon. gentleman having
made reference to him, he begged to offer a few words in
reply. If the hon. gentleman had made on Monday night
the elaborate speech which he now made, he (Sir It.
Inglis) would not have, In the slightest degree, aecussol him
of an unacquaintance with figures. But when the hon
gentleman made the inference in his speech on Monday
night that the Chancellor of the Exchequer intended to
include the whole body of the clergy, bishops, deans,
curates, and all, in the special provision respecting the
euretes, on the ground that a loss of 30,0001. represented
4,000,0001. of income, he thought that the slightest acquaint-
ance with Cocker would have told him that 7d. in the pound
on 4,000,0001. would have represented about four times as
much as 30,0001.
Mr. RICH said that if the hon. baronet would calculate
as he did, not 7d. in the pound, hut !iii , the difference
between 7d. and 60., he would find that it amounted to
near what he said. (Rear.)
Mr. LOWE said that when he ronsidered the firemen,
gr -at and flourishing condition of the country, and that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer calculated a:ion a surplus on
the 6th of April next of 1,350,000/., he should have thought
it would have twin the wisest course to persevere in a
system fraught with such beneficial results. (Hear, hear.!
Ile thought that no case ha 1 been made out fur a change ;
or if a change was to be made, he thought that when they
had disposed of the existing surplus in making those
sinus of taxation which bad produced this wonderful pros-
perity and this increase of revenue, they worill have done
all that under the circumstances they ought to do.
(Hear, hear.) The pretest time being one of un-
exampled prosperity, the probability woo that when a
change came, it would he for the seem, sold not for the
better, and, therefore, he thought it would have been wig- r
I in the right hon. gentleman if he had not enleitlsttd on the
permanency of the existing state of things, and had not
imitated the foolish person who said, tt to-morrow will be as
torlay"—if he had net made his arrangements on the suppo-
sition that they were going to have • period of unabated
prosperity, but on the calculation, that out of a hundred
contingencies one might arise to Wet th it prosperity and
retard their progress. (Hear, bear) lint the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, with the proverbial zeal of converts, not
only adopted free trade, hut wee unehle to cons inee himself
that the pi-Pent prosperity rind progress of the country,
which was owing to that policy, must not go on to then use
as it hail done. (Hear' hear ) Further than this, the
right hon. gentleman stated that he considered the cause of
the great emigration which was taking !dice from this
country did not arise from any want or misery on the part
crf ,Sirr people, hot from a deoire to participate in the riches
opened up in another country. 'therefore, considering that
toiscause, which ruled and relent ited the present emigra-
tion, was one over which the internal organisation
of the country had no control, and that it was
not in our power tie prevent that emigration from
taking piece i n a gm 'Mr prole, he thauglit the
time was ill tufted for recommending any messures to the
hoot- which would give an impulse to the mighty ten-
dency •hat had sprang up—measures that must suggest to
the in ipie of this country in the ILI•0t forcible manner that
there were other lands where there was no house tax, no
income tax, no assessed taxes, and no excise. (Cheers.)
In his opinion—and he spoke with some experience on the
subject—they were going fast enough in the way of emi.