The Express.
London, England, 1853-04-30 00:00:00

rum apermanent it had become • temporary tax. (Oh.) i
And that hi contended changed the whole aspect of the
*pi ••iOn. Witt n Mr. Merman brought forward his motion
ja lets on the subject of this tax, one reason advanced by
hue wan, that having been imposed as a temporary measure,
it bed assumed a permanent character, and though he
aertril with the hon. member rev Montrose, that if an
equal adjustment of the income tax could be obtained, con-
sidering the lerge amount it produced, it would be a valu-
able emcee of revenue, the argument for adjustment came
with less force when they knew it was to be reduced gn-
u' e illy, and in a few years altogether abolished. Then the
nn of the principle of commutation:irons trades to
er
lifOft woe.
. wee not to be reel( Weed as gleam to the pro-
advent:ye which previously wee only al-
the proposed exemptions on Be-
loved to the trader, Ana :3
Arne' Annuities and asuraneee, they were giving facili•
tee fir,anteing provision for the future. It could not be
thet those relaxations amounted to some
eemeeneation for the inequalities with which the tag
was undoubtedly chargeable. The great feature of the
teeter?, however, was the extension of the legacy duty to
peal pr• perry, which would brine that amount of revenue
ahe h enehed the Chancellor of the Exchequer to provide
in the simpitticatiou mud reduction of the a-trued taxes,
the abolition of the soap dote, and the repeal of the customs
duties en a I lege nuattxr of miner maid S. together with
the reduction of the tea dui ies, compensation for the tem-
porary emitinuance of the income tex in its present form.
The ohjeeti tie to which the budget of the right boa. mem-
ber fer Bailee was fairly liable, by uo meanie applied to that
now under cennideretion. There were some minor point:
is the scheme to which objection might reasonably be urged
—cud with retina to the increase in the duty on licenses he
had received c irumunications from SOMA of his constituents
complaining of it, but he understood that that point wee to
be re.eoneidered ; and as the other minor details to which
be alluded did not affect the general principle of the budget,
he was Trade gratefully to accept it as a whole.
Lent A. VANE trusted ,re member would be influenced
in his vote ou this question by the threat which it was un-
derstmal the government hail thrown out, that they would
dissolve parliament if they did not carry their budget—
invead of taking the more constitutional coulee! which had
been adopted by the late government, of resigning.
Contrasting the financial schemes of Mr. Disraeli and
that of the present Cheneellor of the Exchequer, he
stated that the inereax in taxation under the budget of the
late government would have hem 1,060,000/., and the re-
missions wield have amounted to 3,490,000/ , white the in- '
crease of taeetion under the present plan was 3,130,000/., and
the !enlistees :4315,0a0/., and he wished especially to
call the attention of the Irish members to the fact,
that their share of the additional taxation under this budget
would be 698,0001., or 153,000/. atter deducting the remis-
sion of the consolidated ennuities, and including the legacy
they on hind, the increased taxation to be levied on Ireland
was 713,W e. a year.
Mr. I'. URQUHART announced his determination to
support the financial policy of her Majesty's government.
Lord JOCELYN observed that the right hon. gentleman
the President of the Board of Control (Sir C. Wood) had
divided the opponents of the budget into two classes—the
leaded iatereste, and the people of Ireland. There was,
however, a third class—namely, those who dissented from
eersils of the measure, and who, especially, thought that'
the imposition of the income tax for seven years, without
nia.ua or reform, would Co impolitic and injurious to the
ebarecter and commerce of the country. As to Ireland, he
contended that no sufficient equivalent was given; it would
be an additional taxation of aimut 400,0001. (lieu, hear.)
While he was an advocate fur Ireland bearing its fair
share of the national burdens. he contended that it
would be unjust to muke her pay the income tax. He was
'eery to oppose his respected friend the Chancellor of the
Enbequer; but he felt floc this tax would be neither just
nor equable. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. CARDWELL said that, in 1812, when the tax was
introduced by Sir Robert Peel, it had the advantage of his
noble friend's support. (Hear, hear.) In 184 i, Sir It.
Peel had most carefully examined the possibility of extend-
ing to the trading closes the considers ion cow claimed;
and he came to the conelu.ion that it could nut be done.
Nevertheless the hon. member fur Sheffield brought that
Haile lord.
before the house, and it was opposed by the
ride lord. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord objected to the
continuance of the income tax for seven years ; but he so
highly approved the remissions of indirect taxation, and had
such great confidence in those now proposed, that he believed
they woul I be more rapidly. reproductive than the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer anticipated, and, therefore, that, at
an earlier period than seven years, it would be possible to
remit the income-tax. (Hear, hear) His argument
amounted to thin—that the budget was so much better than
was supposed by its promoters, that he would not rote fur
it. (Cheer') The Chancellor of the Exchequer, taking a
prudent U. wand asked fur the income-tax for seven years ;
if, at an earlier period,he,or some future minister, found that
own sources of revenue would enable him to dispense with
it, any hon. member might make a motion to that effect, anal
nodoubethe house would bo happy toreceive the intelligence.
The noble lord objected to the artisan being taxed; but in
December last he had voted for the extension of the income
to to incomes of 1041. a year. Ile spoke of incomes of 6/.
or 61. a week ; but these were already liable as the tax
stood, (Hear, hear.) Ile also opposed its extension to Ire-
land, but admitted teat Ireland might to bear its just pro.
portion of the national burdens. lie said no equivalent was
to be given ; but if it was just and right so to extend the
tax, why should any equivalent be looked for? (Hear.)
They ought to view all parts of the kingdom as one com-
prehensive whole, and to draw as few distinctions as possi-
ble. (Cheers.) Public opinion looked not an much to the
comparative proportion of edvant To to be derived by Eng-
land, Scotland, or Ireland; they believed that a compre-
hensive measure had been proposed, which would be of
great benefit to all. (Chem.) When they last made a great
remission of taxation in 1851, the window tax, which was
loudly called for by public opinion, Ireland did not directly
participate in that advantage; but no objection had been
raised to the measure on that account. (hear) The guts-
tioa at issue was this: were they so satisfied with the past
financial improvements from this income tax, that they were
milling to make another groat and deci,ive step forward in
1110 Name direction. (Hear hear.) The income tax was
Imposed at a remarkable period, when, by successive deficits
for al years, a debt of 10 millions bad been incurred in
times of peace—when other sources of revenue had been
tried and tailed—when they had sought, by the imposition
of 10 per cent. on one portion of the taxes, and 6 per seat.
on another, to rentalc the exchequer—it was under this
necessity, that the great engine of the income tag hod been
muted to. And what WAS the first effect of this experi-
ment? Two =Wives of taxation were removed, and in
throe years, the customs and excise produced as much
as before. (Hear, hear.) In asking for the income
tax foe three years, Sir Robert Peel had led the House
of Commutes to believe that it would be in their option to
remove it at the and of that period. That pledge was net
falsified. At that time there was a balance in the Exche-
quer of 61 millions ; the income-tax produced only
6,100,0001. There was therefore • surplusof above 11
and half a year's income-tax woad have been pa=
the act bad not been renewed. Therefore, at lima dm%
they might have removed the iaeoms-tax, and hen b a
surplus of nearly four millions. But, so much lad 41111111-
Filature been encouraged by that experiment, Hat lbw
resolved to try it again on a larger sale. In 1841, Ese
millions of indirect taxes were taken off ; ix Map *5
71 ;millions had been taken away from the MINN Sod
excise duties is those twopieridas, these two Mm Of
revenue hadagain recovered themselves. (Hear, hue-)
What was their position now? In the ireful they had
removed more than three millions of animism main In
all many eleven millions of arlems sad win
duties, or ratty one-third of the whale prime eg 11me
tare; end agnia those sources of MONIS lad sesormed
threaselvel. (Chem.) Such wea the Wait et tan
which Great Britain had been baring, and homvilith Ire-
land was exempt. But had Ireland had no ohm la this
benefit? Prohibitive duties had begs entirely regaled •
protective defies which discouraged coseansption, had bees;
reduced or remitted; articles of ant seesesity bed been
freed from taxes, as bad the raw materials of newsletters,:
trade had bean stimulated, industry excited, an
larger
ues and Feats had been created. (Hear, heiar.) And
had Ireland derived no share of them &amours /
(Cheers.) Had It been a lose to the starving multitudes of
Ireland that the duties on the import of articles of first
necessity had been removed? (Hear, hear.) Whose suf-
ferings had rendered it necessary for the imperial parlia-
ment to remove the duties on those articles ? (Hear, beer.)
What had been the particular benefit in money value
to Ireland ? The calamity which overtook Ireland
in 1616 had cost us Mr millions of money ;
but by the aid of the income tax we had
been able to pay it. (Hen, hoar.) And had not these
advantages been shared by Ireland ? The shipping of Bel-
fast was doubled; and in the last five yews the traffic upon
railways in Ireland had been more than trebled. (Hear,
bear.) Whence had come the capital that had .bees re-
cently invested in land in Ireland, and which had bees the
mean• of conferring such great benefits on that ormatey,
and developing Pm produce of Ireland?—from those Isar
Mal reforms which had then effected here in the last is
years—(shnn and " No" from some Irish member)—and
which had stimulated the trade and increased the prosperity
the United Kingdom. But they were not now dividing oaths
question whether the income tax should be extended to
Ireland, but upon the general proposition of Sir B. Lytton,
that the tax was unjust and impolitic. (Hear, hear.) From
the arguments which had been used in support of this
amendment by the has. mover and others, he was
convinced that this was really a protectionist amend-
ment in disguise. (Cheers.) The speaker, who
had followed Sir B. Lytton, said that agriculture
bad paid six millions too much in the last six years. Then,
was it the object of this amendment to take taxes from
agriculture and lay them on trade ? If so, let its supporters
say so. (Cheers.) But let them not imagine that the India
and professions of this country were so simple that, under
the guise of a general proposition in favour of redressing
inequality, the friends of agriculture could mend in re-
paving it from some three millions of taxation. (Hear,
hear.) The proposal of the late government would not only
have taxed incomes of 1001. year, but would have taxed
them at • higher rate than the present measure proposed.
The amendment was couched in general terms, and pointed
out no means of redressing the alleged inequality. Mr.
Cobden had told the truth, when he said that it was not
so much Vert inequality as the inquisitorial nature of the
tax that. was objected to. Adam Smith declared that an
inquisitorial tax never would be submitted to by the nstion.
<Cheers from the opposition.) The hon. gentlemen oppca
sea cheered; but had they not made the same proposal?
(Cheers.) It wriest to impossible to unravel the connexion
between property and income; and justice could only be
attained by doing this in every individual ease. (Hear,
pearl la properties as they &preached to justice, Hwy
would add to the inquisitorial nature of the tax. (Here.)
With regard to Ireland the argument was, that it was un-
fair to extend the income tea to A pauperised country. That
argument would not beer caanainatien, bett`PC Dre

8,0, of the Consolidated Annuities would relieve the pre-
sent on the most pauperised didriets ; whereas the Mame
tax wool: be borne by the comparatively rich and wealthy.
(Hear, best.') If he was not misinformed the lion. member
for Mayo, wilt. was so free in his strictures upon others,
proposed in Dubin, in 1817, that an inc.mc tax should be
imposed on Ireland, anstead of the poor-law charge. (Hear,
hear.) And on the 17th March, IblB, when be was charged
in that house with mahir.g such a proposition, he replied
that " he agreed with the hon. member fur Mar, lebone in
tbiaking that property in Ireland ought to be made amen-
able to the income tae. lie thought it just to the people
of this country, sad 'memory fur the welfare of the
people of Ireland that every ma and every description of
property should be made to bear his -hare of the national
burdens. (Cheers.) Whilst the tradesieen of England
were coatriuutiag to the necessities of Ireland, and whilst I
the farmer was trying to bear up against an impossible ex- j
periment, wee it not 'monstrous that the man who received;
twenty times the income of either sheuld be allowed to ;
sneak out of the difficulty and escape tree. (Cheers) Su
far from thinking that the present circumstances of Ireland
exonerated her people from the payment of an income tax,
lie was of opinion that the present condition of the country
was the very reason why they should be taxed." (Cheers.)
Mr. MOOItE said that speech was made in support of a
proposition which lie had put on the paper, but which he
was not allowed to make. He then advocated an income
tax for the purpose of supporting the people of Ireland
through the famine. (Opposition cheers.)
Mr. CAIIDWELL—And now the hon. gentleman was
opposing a proposition which would remit the burden
which was contracted to meet that famine. (Hear.) He
called on the house to consider what they had been able to
effect in consequence of the income-tax. When they were
driven to impose the tax, the capital debt amounted to
791,000,0001. Now, :et the expiration of ten years they
had paid 9,000,0001.011 account of Ireland, and had reduced
the original capital of the debt 12,000,0001., so that they
stood better by 21,000,0001. than they stood before. But
that was not all, for their balances in the Exchequer, which
were then but 1.600,0001., were now hard upon 9,000,0001.,
being an increase of 7,500,0001. (Hear, hear.) It was that
same instrument that euabkd his right hon. friend, the
member for Cambridge (Mr. Ooulburn) to remove from the
annual pressure of the debt 1,2004-001. These were benefits
conferred on the whole of the United Kingdom, and they
were now called on to submit to the income tax for seven
years more, in order that they might be able to carry for-
ward a similar course of policy. (Hear, hear.) They bad
removed the duty on light and air; it was now proposed to
remove the tax on cleanliness. They had diminished the
duty on sugar, it was now proposed to diminish the duty on
tea. (Hear, hear.) They proposed to extend the comforts
of the people by measures which, at the same time, would
stimulate trade and increase the resources of the nation.
(Hear, hear.) That was the question which the house had
now to decide. The first income tax existed for 18 years,
and it enabled them to pass through one of the
greatest revolutions that was ever known. At the
tad of 18GU the second income tax would have
existed 18 years, and would have enabled them to
pass through a different and not less important revolution.
(Hear, hear.) They were now engaged in a peaceful con-
flict with other nations—in a conflict of commercial enter-
prise, and without an income tax, which enabled them to
relieve trade and industry of its fetters, they never would
have prosecuted that conflict to success. (Hear, hear.)
Sir H. Peel found England the dearest and most heavily
taxed country in Europe: l:e removed many of her bur-
dens, and by persevering in the same course of policy this
country would become one of the cheapest and most lightly
taxed countries in Europe ; and no wait hereafter need re-
move to any other country fur the sake of economy. (Hear,
hear.) Let them not therefore discuss which part of the
United Kingdom would be the greatist gala' by the pro-
position of his right hon. friend : but let them, unless they
could show that it would be anywhere uojust in its opera-
tion, cordially support a measure which would promote the
liappine,s and comfort of all. (Cheers.)
Mr. HENLEY hoped that the imoosition of an inmate tax
for 18 years, with all its inequalities unzaitiaated, would
not make a revolution in this country, in the true sense of
the word. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman would not,
at least, contend that these inequalitin produced any part
of the advantages to which he referred; and the question
which the house had now to discuss was, whether, if the
income tax was to continue fur seven years longer, they
ought not endeavour to remedy these inequalities. (Hear,
bear.) Ile went into the committee on the income tax,
under the impression that it would be almost impos-
sible to remove these inequalities; bat he we
bound to say that, after hearing the evidence an
the subject, he came out of it with a differeat
impression. (Hear, hear.) He did not mean to say that
mathematical justice and equality could ever be obtained;
but he was persuaded that some of the inequalities in the
present incidence of the tax could be removed. (Hear,
hear.) li the could not precisely distinguish between
capital and income in all cases, they could mitigate the in-
justice in the case of those incomes which were of a wholly
different character. (Loud cheer') In regard to
taxation Ireland stood in a different position from
England, because they started in 1800 frem a different point,
and they. must keep that distinction in view when they were
considering the relative taxation of the two countrits.
(Hear, hear.) This tax was proposed for seven years only,
but he did not believe that it would be given up at the eel
of that time. Some of the supporters of the government
voted fur the proposition because they believed the tax
would be permanent, whilst others again voted for it be-
cause it was to be only temporary. (Our. hear.) Which
was it to he ? How could bon. gentlemen reconcile such
opposite views? (Hear, hear.) With regard to the relative
merits of the two budgets, that of his right hos. friend and
that of the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, whilst he admitted the great ability and Moquette*
of the right hon. gentleman, he must say thM the primula
I tin of hie hon. friend was more favourable to the landed in-
tercet and to the country !generally. These were some of
the reasons which would induce him to vote for the amend-
ment. Another reason was that if it was to be a temporary
tax, it was unwise to extend it to Ireland.
Mr. CAIRNS said with reference to the imputations
which had been cast on the members for Ireland, that he
would never in that house demand for Ireland anything in
the nature of • boon, and he would never
roof to give his
vote for what appeared to him a matte justice.
He would say, with regard to the income-tax,
that if it were to be • permanent tax, and if it were ad-
justed so as to get rid of its present inequalities, he should
not refuse his vote to extend it to Ireland. Having said
this he would state the grounds on which he would vote
for the amendment. la the first place he came to the de-
termination on grounds concerning the income tax as much
for England as for Ireland. Every one admitted that the
income tax, as it now stood, was inequitable and unjust.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer admitted it, but he did
sot say It was impossible to rectify theseinerittalities; he said
it was a matter of care and difficulty. So long as it was un-
equal and unjust he should gvs his vote against it.
He thought when they were called upon to renew the
income tax for seven years they ought to be satisfied as to
the exact amount of another tax which was to replace it,
and which was of a novel and untried description. He
referred to the proposed tax on saccoesions. He was not
going to argue whether it was a good tax or not. He
would say at once that the exclusion of land from the tax
ea seesendeste was an invidious exclusion. He should be
irelllnd If the whole ageerm of taxation on succeed ,ns
be eseneared, ME land brought into it, provided
eery would iseliffihr thee*" duties to which land was now
subject, the Miff. duty SS Vanden, and all the other duties
ai which land Mae ealgent, GM which personal property
was utterly Ximemllieltut=Ml they would treat it is
senjuaction the Imam of the transfer of
land, provided they meld heat it with all those necessary
adjuncts, he for on. MIMI be ready to enter into it.
As regarded the IMMO tax, there was one special
reason why it *ILONA to him impolitic to extend
it to Ireland. to
said it was tem-
porary ; and if they were serious in that state-
ment, he would ask whether it was worth while
to subject the Irish nation for 'even years to a tax,
the machinery of which neither they nor their fathers ever
saw? (Cheers.) Sir Robert Peel, when he introduced the
income us, said be did not propose to subject Ireland to it
beeaaae the measure was temporary, and because in that
eratars7 there was no machinery for levying it. At the
sem* thee Sir Robert Peel proposed what he represented as
ea equivalent for the lamas tax in an additional duty on
linos and on spirits. (Hear, hear.) Notwithstanding
the sobseqeent alterations, the stamp duties were still
snarl double what they were before the income tax was im-
posed, and the spirit duty was now to be increased.
Hear, hear.) The right on.h baronet the member for
im-
posed,
declared,the ether ulght,tbat he had alwaysheencon-
'latent in his views with regard to Ireland. Now it happened
that, in a speech mode Mt
mostlymanyt he was enti months since, the r
ight
bon. bon. baronet stamostlytharely
be des estuaries aft ammo tax to Ireland. (Opposition
W, Se neer Millthet, when be spoke of Ireland, he
Met the while Seuntry, but only certain tracts and
dilledsts of it, not including such towns as Belfast. He
Mil out to his own satisfaction that Ireland would be a
Cm of some five or six millions by the whole cream-
In this, however, he was guilty of two fallacies: one
Ides that the income tax would last only seven
yeles; the other, that, it the consolidated annuities
wens not remitted, they would be paid. (Great laughter.)
As regarded the set-off between the two, it was altogether
an Irish piece of hum. Translated iato plain English, it
meant nothing but this—that one past of Ireland was to
pay the debt of another part. (Hear, Mar.) The northern
counties of Ireland, which had no consolidated annuities,
but a great deal of income, Were to have an Mouse tax put
upon them, which was to he applied. in the payment of
debts duo from the south of Ireland. It was as though the ;
government tried to impose a tax on.Livespool for Ow relief 1
of land in Dorchester. (Hear, hew.) Tim right hen. gen- '
tleman the President of the Booed of Trade said his was
delighted that the time had arrive/ when the Irish
debt was to be made an imperial question. He Mr.
Cairns) was afraid that his sonstMuents would suffer
from this imperial view of the eau. (Hear, bear.) He
!,
could sot help here remarking that there were some places
in this north which had so rats in aid, having paid it off ; I;
and it it were true that the remainder of the debt, gene-
rally, ought to be paid out of thc imperial treasury—(" no,
no," (rem the ministerial side)—how could the government
rause to restore the money thus advanced ? At present, all
the trivernment did in the matter was to say, in effect,
W a give you an equivalent in the shape of an income
taz ." (Laughter.) When any government had to legislate
foe; Ireland, it always'aPpeared to do so in an Irish fashion
I n this case, a party who had paid the debt was not
merely put in the came position as the party who
had not paid it, but was actually called upon to pay
something else into the bargain. (Laughter.) Now he
begged to tell the right hon. baronet (Sir C. Wood), that he
was not ungrateful for the complimentary manner in which
he had spoken of his constituents; and he would add, that
for the Merrill which they bad euloyed, the inhabitants

of Belfast were indebted, under Providence, to their own
energy, industry, and self-reliance. But the right hod-
bsronet had, he dare say, heard of • fable about a ea:rtsin
animal, of which he thought he might say he had imitated
the artifice, though he hoped he would not realise the
success. No doubt he knew the story of • fox—(laughter)
—which, by means of more compliments than were deserved,
contrived to charm out of the month of a crow a contribu-
lion to his budget—(great laughter)—not of incomes,
but of cheese. (Laughter.) The moral of this fable was
instructive. The people of Belfast would of course feel very
much flattered by the complimentary observations of the
right hon. baronet, but he did not think they world be
flattered into liking his income tax. (Cheers and laugh-
ter.) He could only say fur himself, as one of those to
whom the right hon. baronet had especially addressed his
arguments, that be hall considered those arguments, that
he remained unconverted,and that he should vote for the
amendment. (Cheers.)
Sir W. CLAY then moved the adjournment of the
debate.
Lord J. RUSSELL mid he should not otject to the
motion of his hoc. friend, if there were any members who
wished to speak on the question, but he did hope that the
debate would be concluded on Monday. There were •
great many notices of motion awaiting discussion, and it
would be very inconvenient if the debate were not finished
on Monday tight.
Mr. DISRAELI said there were several gentlemen who
wished to address the committee, but so for as he could col-
lect their opinion, there would be no tlitficulty in coming
to a division on Monday.
The debate was then adjourned till Mendel.
TAXING OFFICER, COMMON LAW BUSINESS
(IRE LAN D), BILL.
This bill passed through committee pro forma.
SALES OF BULLION BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
- - -

ENTAILS (SCOTLAND) DILL.
The LORD ADVOCATE, in moving the second reading
of this hill, explained that its object was merely to rectify
some omissions in an act passed 601110 years since with refe-
rence to the same matter.
The bill was read a second time.

MERCHANT SHIPPING BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
AGGRAVATED ASSAULTS BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.

CHATHAM BOROUGH.
Mr. COLLIER moved that a writ should issue for the
election of a burgess for Chatham, in the room of `fir F.
Smith. lie thought that the house would agree with him
that writs ought not to be withheld, except upon strong
grounds, and upon some definite and intelligible rule. It
seemed to him that where a case was made out for a com-
mission a welt ought not to issue, but where a case was not
made out that it ought. Upon the report of the committee
in this instance no case was established for a commission.
Only one case of bribery was stated in the report. It was
true that the committee found that the Admiralty had great
influence in the borough, and that the government candi-
dates were generally elected. But this was matter which
could only be fitly dealt with by legislative enactment, and
it might well be a subject for consideration, whether per-
sons employei in a dockyard ought to be entrusted with
the franchise? Ile understood that the chairman of the
committee did not oppose the issuing of the writ. A week's
notice had been given to the electors.
Sir J. SHELLEY wished to call attention to the report
of the committee. After stating that oue elector bad been
bribed by an appointment as a letter carrier, it went on to
say, that it appeared to the committee that a large number
of electors were employed in the dockyards who were under
the influence of the government fur the time being ; that
there was no initance of • candidate being returned who
had not the influence of government. lie, therefore,
thought that the house should consider whether or not the
right of voting ought to be withdrawn from the borough of
Cliethem.
Mr. BRAMSTON. agreed with the hon. gentleman who
moved that this writ should issue. The committee not
having felt itself justified in proposing a commission, he did
not thine that course ought now to be followed. At ano-
ther time it might be well for the house to consider whether
the i ieht of voting ought to extend to these dockyard bo-
roughs. At the same time it should be remembered that
out of 1,200 voters the committee found that from 300 to
400 were directly under the influence of government.
Mr. HEYWOOD wished to call the attention of the
beam to a case which came before the committee. It was
that of a men named Charles Beveridge, a shipwright, who
used against the goverament candidate in 1835, and who
slue that time had been carefully kept back. He hoped
that when the present representative system came under
revision this cue would not be lost sight of in reference to
the question of the ballot.
Mr. AGLIONBY said it was very true that only. one
case of bribery was reported as proved by the committee,
but it was well known to hon. members that when one case
o' bribery was established, considerable laxity prevailed in
proving other vises; it did not follow therefore that only
one case occurred.
Lord J. RUSSELL said it seemed to him that this was
a cave of a very peculiar character. It was not merely one
of those cases which were dealt with by declaring that cor-
rupt practices bad prevailed, and decided that • commission
shout', issue, but one in which the committee suggested that
it might be proper to withhold the privilege of electing
members altogether. This appeared to him to be a serious
question, and one in which other government dockyards
might be interested. (Hear, hear.) The question of dis-
franchisement was a serious one, and he was not pre-
pared to go that length. But there was another
remedy which, in his opinion, was worthy the consideration
of the house, and that was, if there were in the
royal dockyards • number of persons under government in-
fluence, and liable to be called on to vote for the candidate
of the government, it might be a question whether it would
not be proper that such maims should be placed on the
same footing as revenue officers. (Hear, hear.) He did
not say that such would he the proper remedy, but it did
seem to him that the question raised such grave considera-
tions as not to be capable of settlement at that time of night,
and after a long discussion on a totally different subject.
There was no great injustice in withholding the writ for a
abort time, and therefore he would suggest that the debate
should be adjourned until Friday next, or some time when
it would be convenient for the house to consider the case.
Issue of writ postponed to Friday next.
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH.
Mr. CRAUFU RD moved the issue of a new writ for the
borough of Maidstone, in the room of Mr. Geo. Dodd.
Mr. DISRAELI observed that the evidence in this case
had sot been laid on the table.
lie. PIiINN said that no evidence had been heard. Se-
Sou charges of treating were brought forward, but the
sitting member did not defend his seat. He would suggest
the adjournment of this case also.
Mr. CRAUFURD said that this was merely a case of
treating. The sitting member was personally exculpated,
and the committee had not thought it proper to issue a
special report.
After an °toleration from Mr. Dleakint, the issue of the
writ was postponed.
LAW OF BANKRUPTCY (SCOTLAND).
The LORD ADVOCATE moved for leave to bring in a
bill to amend the law of bankruptcy in Scotlaad. The
.cages he proposed to make were, fleet, to make sequestra-
tion attach immediately ; secondly,.to abolish the office of
Nestor, and to make the sheriff take possession of the pro-
perty—(hear, hear)—thirdly, in order to avoid delay, he
proposed to make the adjudication of the sheriff final ; and,
lastly, he proposed to accelerate the time for the declaratioa
of dividend. Its proposed, in addition to this, so to frame
the machinery of the bill as to facilitate the discharge of
the honest, and to retard that of the dishonest debtor.
There were some minor details, but he trusted the outline
he had given would sufficiently explain the object of
the bill.
After an expression of approbation from Mr. CowAN,
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
CASE OF LIEUTENANT INOLEDUE.
Sir G. PECHELL rose to call attention to the case of
Lieut. Ingledee, of the Royal Navy, which he designated as
being of a imewhat an extraordinary nature. It appeared
that in 1840 Lieut. Ingledus thought proper to leave the
Royal Navy ; and, in consequence, a letter was addressed
to him by Mr. More O'Ferrall, the then Secretary to the
Admiralty, ordering him to hold himself in readiness to
join his ship. On the 19th August in the same year,
Lieutenant Ingledue wrote a most improper letter, de-
, eluting to take the appointment of lieutenant, but
expressing his readiness to take that of captain, the
ground of his refusal being that he had recently taken the
their
lordshipscommand
fa
mheercpbaurocetedskip.
Wiathveoutthtehceoutry
permission
ainodn
ionf
esmesquence his name was erased from the navy list. No
OM was heard of him for two years, when there was a
bell heard of Admiralty, and be applied to be restored.
lie did the case of Lieut. Wagborn, but was told that it
stood en different grounds, and was refused. He again re-
mained unheard of for nine years, when, in December 1851,
when another board being in, he applied again and was
again refused. He appealed to his exertions to establish
steam communicatioa with India, but his schemes were so
wild that the Oriental Company were obliged to :veal
him. This was when Sir F. Baring wain office in Jan. 1852.
The hon. and gallant gentleman then went on to state that
Mr. Stafford, on June 10th, Mr. Stafford then being Secre-
tary to the Admiralty, had referred Mr. Ingletlue to the
decisions of former boards, that being in answer to a re-
newed application from Mr. Ingledne. On the 24th June
Mr. Ingledue remonstrated; and was again rebuffed by a
reference to the former answer. The general election then
took place. At Southampton Sir Alexander Cochrane and
Mr. B. Wilcox were the liberal candidates. Mr, Staff ird
was at that time . frequently at Southampton, mid Mr.
Ingledue's services against the liberal candidates having
been made use of (so much so that his employers in the
Peninsular and Oriental Company rebuked him), he made
a new application on the 30th November, calling atten-
tion in his memorial to his capacity as gunner, and
to his " ability to serve the government at South-
ampton," if he should be appointed superintendent of
equipmeat vessels ; and on the 22nd December Captain
Hamilton, the second secretary, intimated to him that his
application bad been considered, and that he was at liberty
to memorialise the Queen In council. He did so, and on
the 3rd January the Board of Admiralty, to whom the
memorial had been referred, recommended her blejesty to
grant its prryer. This letter of the Admiralty was only
signed by the two political lords, and the question was why
the naval lords bad also not concurred ? The result was
that Mr. Ingledue was restored, and when the new govern-
ment came in Mr. Osborne had to inform him that his half-
pay would re-commence at a stated period, and that he was
to holdhimulf in readiness for an appointment. But in the
mean time Sir A. Cockburn had gone down to Southamp-
ton for re-election, and Mr. Ingledue, restored to his posi-
tion, was at Southampton too. These were elm:matinees
which ought to be inTestigated, it being palpable that the

Board of Adiafealty, under the late goverssweat, had
for political purposes, departed from the rule usually taken
is such cases. The late board had, in feet, rewardet for
services on the hustings, and sot for services on the quarter-
deck. And this was not the only ease that would be found
out. (Oh, oh 1) The navy felt indignant at such practieis
—(uter, hear)—sad he hoped the whole matter would be
,ie into. lie moved that the returns respecting Mr.
heb.due be referred to the select committee on dockyard
aprojgh.:ents.
c,ptain
.SCOBELL seconded the motion; and also ex-
Lredseedwetiairecip...f •thtat thenavywhowleentransacas
stake
in the
nihlntowurr.
I ShTesAFr.)FORD admitted ...hat • Lieutenant
Ingledue
lad been struck off the lists, and haft remained off during
year., but the board replaced lmo on the ground that he
would be of great service in manninj; the navy, is 0011,,,11*-
quotes of his connexion with the merca mite. marine. This
connexion was set forth in the second meo:enat "e"."17•""
to the late hoard, and it was upon that reprea'atatten that he
had been reinstated. The appointment could have nothing
to do with the election, seeing that in June, wizen the first
memorial was sent ill—that was on the very eve bf the ge-
neral election he met with a point blank refusal. :lad at
the election Lieutenant Ingledue voted for both the con.wr-
votive and the liberal candidate. lie thought he had said
enough to show that political motives had nothing to do
with the proceeding. The late board in this instance had
acted for the benefit of the service in restoring this gentle-
man to his rank, sod be believed that was the general
opinion in the navy. If, however, the present board
thought differently, it was open to them again to strike
Lieut. Ingledue from the list.
}lr. PIIINN suggested that the reason the reinstatement
of Lieut. logledeu had not taken place in June was that
he hsd not earned it by voting for his patron. And the
fact that he voted on both aides only proved that he gave
one vote for his conscience and another (or his interest. He
had heard no answer to the question, whether the two naval
Lords of the Admiralty had not di:wonted from their poli-
tical colleagues and protested against the appointment.
Mr. STAFFORD happened to be from town when the
appointment took place, sad if the hon. and learned gentle-
man would look at the document he would see that he had
not signed it. However, he was prepared to share the
responsibility of his co-secretary. With regard to what debate
or division might have taken place at the board in refer.
cues to this appointment. it would be unusual, and at the
same time prqudicial to the public service, to report In
that house or elsewhere. If such a practice were permitted
it would be impossible to carry on the public service.
Captain DUNCOMBE defended the appointment of
Lieutenant Ingledue, end stated that he had performed
the duties entrusted to him in an efficient manner.
The motion was then put and agreed to.
Oa the motion of Mr. BALL certain returns in reference
to the Fee Fund of the Court of Chancery in Ireland were
ordered.
And the house adjourned at 20 minutes after 1 o'clock.

THE COMMITTEE ON DOCKYARD PRO-
MOTIONS AND APPOINTMENTS.

On the committee re-nasembling yesterday at
11 o'clock—Lord Seymour, chairman ; Lord Heehaw, Sir
Benjamin Hall, Sir Ferguson Davie, sad Mr. Beckett,
Capt. Duncointie, one of the Lords of the late Board of
Admiralty, addressing the committee said—Before they
commenced the proceedings of the day he might be allowed
on behalf of Mr. Stafford, and
.any member of the late
Board of Admiralty, to say that yesterday they abstained
from potting any questions to the different witnesses,
having received no intimation from the committee that
they bad not their sanction to do so, but seeing that the I
evidence taken yesterday had been published in the morning
papers, be thought it was only stir that they should
have an opportunity of putting. questions to the witnesses,
either for the purpose of explaining any matters not pee- I
feetly understood or with the view of contradicting any- I
thing erroneous. They also felt extremely obliged to the
cemmittee for yesterday proposing an sdjournmeot until Sa-
turday, but they were of opinion that under the circum
names the examination bad better be proceeded with to-
day. They hoped at that period that the case, if it might
be so called, for the prosecution, would close ; and that then,
by an adjournment of the committee to Monday, Mr. Staf-
ford would be prepared to enter on hie defence.
The Chairman said—Witb reference to the matter of
questions, of course any question desired to be pat to any
witness may be properly put through a member of the
committee, or through the chairman. That is the usual
course, and it might have been adopted yesterday if it was
thought desirable.
The following letter, addressed to the committee by Sir
Francis Baring relative to the subject of this inquiry, was
then read :
" 88, Jtrmyn-street, April 28.
"My Lord,—l take the liberty of addressing you as
chairman of the committee appointed in consequence of Sir
B. Hall's motion. The committee may find it necessary, in
the performance of their duty, to call upon those officers
who served while I was at the Admiralty, and of putting to
them questions relating to what passed between them and
me. I take, therefore, the liberty of requesting that if the
committee should see no objection, these officers should be
informed when so questioned that I release them from any
obligation of secrecy, and that they are at liberty and it is
my wish that they should communicate to she committee
without the slightest reserve any communication, either in
writing or verbal, which they may have had with me which
may in any way affect the subject before the committee.
I am, my lord, your very obedient servant,
" The Lord Seymour." " F. BARING.
Captain Milne was then called and examined at greet
length by. the chairman. He deposed to having been at
the Admiralty under several administrations. Was first
appointed in December, 1847, under Lord Auckland, and
then under Sir Francis Baring and Sir James Graham.
Witness was in Admiral Parker's room, on the 22nd April,
when Sir B. Walker brought his letter tendering his resig-
nation ; but neither Sir Is. Walker nor any of the Lords of
the Admiralty consulted witness on the subject, neither did
the Secretary of the Admiralty request him to speak to Sir
B. Walker on the subject. Was present at the Board of
Admiralty, on the 26th of April, when • circular was
issued having reference to the previous one issued by the
Secretary of the Admiralty. Did not notice that the original
minute ran "Misconstruction having arisen with reference to
to the circular," and that the printed copy given in as
called for by the Rouse of Commons ran, "Misconstruction
having arisen with reference to the (their lordships) eir-
' solar. Such a circular, emanating from the Admiralty,
In either form of expression, would be taken as sent in the
Mile of the board if transmitted by the secretary. It was
set usual, however, for the Secretary of the Admiralty to
ham circulars of any kind, as their lordships' circulars,
which had not been formally considered, discussed, and
eseationed by the board. Any circular so issued by the
neerietery would be an irregularity. There should be two
Meaelleso present, with the secretary. The only case in
which the secretary might use the name of a Lord of the I
Admiralty without having first applied to them or obtained
their sanction, was with reference to minor details and mat-
ters under his own supervision. For instance, the secretary
having the patronage of appointments in the yard
would have authority as regarded minor details
to correspond or use the Larne of the board,
l asdet as the head of the store department, as witness
authority to give orders on minor details. It
was necessary in these matters to draw a discretionary line.
had it was a difficult matter to dans, but as a general rule
ebe Secretary of the Admiralty had no authority to give
lay order at all, with reference to anything that affected •
atlas
principle. At that time all recommendations
the Sur-
for
and appointment went through
of the Navy, who was the really controlling
ter. The Surveyor of the Navy's position was
this: he was responsible to the Admiralty for the
whole of the works, for the estimates, and the
expenditure with reference to those works, and to the
employments in 'the yard.
end it was therefore necessary
that he should have the centred of the appointments taking
place, so that they might neither get a-head of his outlay
nor his outlay a-bead of them.
The Chairman—Have you, Captain Milne, taken any
part in polities at any time t None whatever, either
directly or indirectly. I was first appointed on the express
undentanding that I should take no part in politics. The
same thing was stated to me on my subsequent macestion to
the Admiralty, and I have faithfully adhered to that de-
alaration.—Do you think that promotions in the dockyard
had, before the issue of the circular 19th April, been used
politically ?—I believe not, certainly I have no reason to
say so.—Have yon any reason to think that political
Mrm aon either led to promotions or to persons being
trEtover t—Certainly not. All the appointments made
F. Boeing were on the distinct understanding that
those receiving them were to take no plitical part in their
departments, and that was the direction given by him to
all the superintendents of the dockyards.
By the Chairman—From your general knowledge of
dockyards, and from having inquired into tuna with a
view to promote the efficiency and economy of the service,
do you think it would be desirable that the men in dock-
yard should cease to have votes I—Well, I think it would
be advantageous to the service.
The witness then went on to state that Mr. Stafford ex-
pressed to him a wish that he should endeavour to smooth
matters, and when he went to Sir B. Walker he went for
that purpose, and as the mutual friend of both parties, to
use his influence as a mediator is an amicable way ; and
witness by his influence with Sir B. Walker got him not to
send the letters called for. It was due to Sir B. Walker
to state that. Had not noticed at the time that the corre-
spondence was called for in the house, and thought it was
better this should be done than that the whole matter
should be raked up again. Witness thought he should
hear no more of it.
Captain Pelham, private secretary
to the Duke of Nor-
thumlaerland, deposed to baying delivered Sir B. Walker's
letter of 10th May to the Duke. He was his Graces con.
fidential secretary, and submitted to the committee whe-
ther his answering questions might be dispensed with,
though ;he thought it right to state the Duke had given
him no directions whatever as to refusing to do so.
Sir Baldwin Walker was here asked several questions
with reference to his submissions for promotion. Had no
copies of these. Had searched two days in the Record-office
of the Admiralty, hut they could not be found. They might
be foiled at Woolwich.
Mr. Barrow, keeper of the records at the Admiralty,lind
Mr. J. H. Ilay, chief clerk of the Admiralty, were then
examined at tedious length with reference to the system
pursued in the reception of documents and their deposit in
the record department.
I The Chairman then said the committee would inquire
late the case of Cotsell.
I Sir 11. Walker was accordingly called, and deposed to
the circumstances connected with the appointment of
James Wells as master smith in Portsmouth Dockyard,
and the subsequent cancelling thereof, and the appointment

of George Coned' in his stead. It would be surerfluous de-
tail of evidence to give this, it having been already fully
made public faith in the proceedings before the Chatham
election committee and in the debate in the House of Com-
mons on the 19th April.
Mr. Bell, clerk in the Admiralty, deposed that he made
out a warrant for Welles appointment on probatioa, but that
it was sent to Wells. It was sent up to the Secretary
after being made out. Sometimes warrants were not thought
'necessary, but a letter was.
Mr. Tien, head clerk of parliamentary department, de-
pend to the warrant and letter for Wells's appointment on
Ls
phation coming before Capt. Hamilton, the Assistant Se-
kyksslre of the Admiralty, for signatere. When Captain
:aw them he said, " Who could
aspointed
Wells master jl,%ith.? I know nothing at all theta
his appointment,' area L: then desired witness to get the
original minutes appointing Wells from the record office.
When Captain Hamilton saw the appointment was minuted
by Admiral Parker, he said, " Admiral Parker is not au-
thorised to make this minute." Captain Hamilton then
oonsulted Sir T. Herbert, Lord of the Admiralty, and they
agreed it had batter be kept over until Mr. Stafford re-
turned from the Mediterranean the following week, as it
was well naderstood that dockyard appointments were
vested in Mr. Stafford.
By the Chairman—Did you see them ready for signa-
ture ?—I did. They were given into my hands by Captain
Hamilton, and I was desired to keep them until Mr. Staf-
ford returned. And then what did you do with them ?
On Mr. Stafford's return I gave them either to him or to
Mr. Grant, lam not certain which. I considered it imma-
terial to which I gave them, because if I gave them to Mr
Grant it would be for Mr. Stafford. It was the day Mr.
Stafford returned or the day after. I have not seen these
papers since, either in the hands of Mr. Grant or Mr. Staf-
ford. I bad nothing to do with the papers after that time.
The Chairman—Mr. Stafford, I understand, now wishes
to defer his evidence on the first point involved in this in-
quiry, via., on the circular of 19th April, until Monday.
Mr. Stafford—Yes.
The Chairman—And not to go on till to-morrow.
Mr. Stafford—And not to go on till to-morrow ; but I
would rather be examined to-day on the subject of the
letter I sent to the First Lord.
The Chairmaa—Then the committee will take that part
of your evidence, and afterwards, on Monday, examine
Cotaell and Scott.
Mr. Stafford—My only reason for wishing to be examined
on that letter is that it seems to cast some imputation on
the character—the professional character—of my collet=
I wish to remove all difficulty and imputation from
by simply fitting that I remember to have received *a
.
The Chairman—Then I would just ask you—you heard
the evidence given by Mr. Piers respecting the minute that
was missing ?
Mr. Stafford—l did.
The Chairman—Can you give the committee any infor-
mation on the subject ?
Mr. Stafford-1 put in a letter I wrote to Sir .1. Graham,
the First Lord of the Admiralty. It is as follows :
" 6, Old Bond-street, April 30,1853.
"My dear Sir,—l did not quite understand last night in
the House of Commons what was the missing document to
which Admiral Berkeley referred in his speech, but I see
by the Times of this morning that it is the submission of
the yor of the navy recommending Mr. Wells, on Sept.
9th, 18.53 (sic.)
" I most distinctly remember receiving that document.
To the best of my belief the letter or submission in the
Parliamentary Paper 271, is an exact copy of it. 1 am
quite willing to state this in the House of Commons.
" Truly yours, Auci. STAFFOIID.
" Sir James Graham."
Mr. Stafford—l thought it better not to raise the question
again in the House of Commons during the discussion of
this matter in this committee, hut as it seemed to affect the
conduct of Piers and Grant, I was anxious to take the
responsibility on myself. That is I want to say now.
The Chairman—Are you aware whether the warrant for
the appointment of Wells was made out?
Mr. Stafford—No; I believe it was never made out, to
the best of my belief. •
The Chairman—Do you know whether it has been made
out, even without reference to its being sent?
Mr. Stafford-1 know it bad never been sect, and I
think Mr. Piers told me it had not been made out.
Sir B. Hall—He said he made it out, and gave it to Mr.
Grant and yourself.
Mr. Stafford—l stated nmy place in the House of Cow
mons, that of course the warrant was stopped when no
appointment was granted to another. A warrant would
not be sent to a man where there was no appointment fee
it. Of course the warrant was never sent withuut a signs.
ture. It would be waste paper.
The Chairman—Do you remember receiving the warrant
for the appointment not signed, but ready for signature ?
Mr. Stafford—l cannot say I do, but most probably it
was with my papers. At all events, there is not the least
responsibility attaching to Mr. Piers or Mr. Grant. It will
rest on me. They are not to be blamed. I did not wish
any further question now, except distinctly to mention
that I take the whole responsibility, end remove it from
Mr. Piers and Mr Grant, and take it on myself.
The Chairman—Then on Monday you will be prepared,
after we have taken Cotsell and Scott, which will not
occapy many minutes.
Mr. Stafford—Very well.
The Chalrelav—Theu we shall not sit to-morrow.
Adjourned to Monday.