The Express.
London, England, 1851-05-06 00:00:00

In emy Ira PODMOW
lin I.
mii, ad in -_
Mitregew
at Ow first Oki Ilitra.n.
le collidrawn now and itel.4llll74llthnigit dirlirs se
- - \
L l •,t- 7p eillelleee with
.tson,leave.
ean
BO DE ItO ass preemeled kis peti
which
was ordered to be parr with the atm
PROPERTY AND INCOME TAX BILL.
Onbrthe order, of the day for going into committee es this
bill ad'
Lord J. SELL mid—Before you proceed is ib. re.
re. of this bill, with regard to property of kg=
I think it desirable that either my right MI.
the Cheneallor of the Exchequer or myself shoal Mrs
the erns we purpose to • pones with round to
this easmare, as well a the dareial Romp to
general of the country. (Seer, Iter.) As it ie a nmilne
that fespatitthe yernament ia I thought it bare
that 1 *en mice upon myself rattatti. of stalk* it to the
bones. The hems ea Friday Idgill. by • •11=421
came to the daskies that ose
terse Instead of
be the period throug whisk the and berm an
should lest. The hen h
em torn foe Ifs ems
(Mr. Hume), who mob the setter, mated se his wound
for doing so that it woo theirable that inquiry shoat take
place with regard to this tax, with • view to make it mon
just; and that, alteration and modification being introduced
tho tax should be continued. (Hear) 1 000ul sot wet
then, nor as I now agree is the orehron whet it ins de.
sirsble to abridge the dentist of the tax far that purpose.
1 think it would be better it as • matter of principle, the
I house had been asked to agree to inquiry with a new to the
1 modification of the tax as regards its general principle : but
' the house having decided otherwise, it was for us to consider
what course we should take so as to maintain the public
credit and financial system of the country. Now,
although, in my opinion it is very inexpedient so far
is plans this tax in jeopardy by altering its du-
Tries ban three years to one year, yet I eaa-
aot senior that the majority of the house who "peed
isi ocraining that motion entertained any view or totes-
tVet whatever to jeopardise the public credit of the country.
(Criss of " hear, hear.") I could not suppose so, because
the house at its first assembling, after the general election,
showed its determination as well to sustain the public cre-
ditor, as to provide for the necessary establishments of the
country. I could not so suppose, because amongst the mem-
bers who voted fur the motion of the hon. member for
Montrose, were many distinguished,both by their acts and
speeches, fur their determination to maintain the public
credit and provide the necessaries of the public service.
Therefore, concluding such to be the intention of these
hon. members, we have to consider whether or not we am
adopt the resolution of the house, and proceed with the
bill in its present state. Now, many gentlemen, who, in
private, have argued this question with me, stated
there was a general impression prevalent through the
country that this tax, which is unequal at present, should
be made more equitable and just. 1 have replied to than
that Mr. Pitt, as well as Sir Robert Peel, and others de
had been in office and engaged in carrying out the financial
arrangements of the country, had always come to a different
conclusion. It has been replied to me that .` the conclusion
to which they came should be supported by inquiry, and
that the country would feel satisfied by the result. That,
on the other hand, it should be shown that the tax, by a
modification, could be made more fair and equitable, and
that in such cue alterations might be adopted ; so that, in
either way the tax might be safe." I have no doubt that
these gentlemen who expressed such opinions in private,
acted tutirely on that view in supporting tho motion of the
hon. member fur Montrose on Friday night. Seeing, then,
that the house, contrary to our opinion, has come to that
conclusion, we think it desirable in the present state of
affairs, that there should be an inquiry on the subject. (Cries
of .. Hear, hear.") I think, such being the decision of the
house, it would not be fair or wise to attempt to refuse or
evade that inquiry ; bat that there ought to be a fair in-
quiry, and that it should be conducted by the men who, in
this house, arc generally the leaders in financial subjects,assd
to whom the house is disposed to pay every deference.
1 have further to say that the governelent is prepared to
institute a full and fair inquiry into this subject. (Hoer,
hear.) but, sir, a further question naturally arises, and
that Is whether, accepting the income tax for a year only,
we can allow of any further modification of that tax, aad
whether we can in any other respect disturb the Amara
system of the year, which my nght hon. friend has
posed. Now, in reference to this point we have to ooaaiaer
that the house, by its previous vote, agreed to a continu-
ance of the income tax fur a limited period, and rejected
the motion of the right hon. gentleman the member be
Stamford, who proposed that • part of the income tau
equivalent to the eliding surplus should be applied to a
in:minion of so much taxation. The house likewise agreed
to the proposition of my right hon. friend fur a repeal of
the window duty, and for supplying a part of the deficiency
occasional by the los of that tax, by a tax
on a more equitable principle, levied on the
owners and occupiers of house property. The house
also agreed without a division, I believe, to the resolution
of my right hon. friend, with respect to the timber and
("ite duties, which resolution formed • main portion of the
proposition for the filmingl arrangements of the year. Now
we should be extremely reluctant to forego the repeat of
the window tax, which we regarded not so much as a peat
financial burden as a great social evil. (11car, hear.) We
considered, therefore, it would be a great misfortune if we
were ohigeal to maintain that tax which the house resolved
to get rid of ; but at the same time we must consider that
in order to carry that resolution into effect we ought to
have it made clear to us that during the pendency of
the inquiry no further alteration of the income tax,
no diminution of the produce of that tax' is to
take place ; and, in the next place, that there
is to, be no further bunlen thrown upon the finances of the
country, so as to deprive the Chancellor of the Exchequer
of the means of upholding the public credit, and meeting
the coat of those public establishments which the house has
agreed should be maintained. (Hear, hear.) In asking
thus much, I don't think I am making any unreasonable
requirement of the house. We propose, therefore, to go
on with the income tax altered and limited as it is by the
proposition of nip hon. friend, but in doing so we expect
that the income tax shall pass without further modification,
and likewise that dm whole revenue, which we hope to se-
cure will 1w secured to us, so as to enable us to repeal the
window tax, and to carry into effect the resolutious with
regard to the timber and coffee duties. (Hear, hear.) I
may perhaps ask the house to allow me to correct a mis-
conception which seemed to prevail on Friday night iu the
mind of any hon. friend. My bon. friend seemed to think
that 1 reproached him for asking for the aid of a party
with whom he does not agree in general political sentiment,
and supposing that such was the case, he said that that was
often my own etlldtioll. But I made no such reproach to
my hon. friend on that subject. 1 think that when parties
happen to agree on the immediate question before the
house, it is evidently quite natural that they should agree
also in their vote. But observing what the motive of my
hon. friend was in making his proposition I said I did not
think he and gentlemen opposite were agreed in
the ultimate obect at which they aimed. For
I instance, when had the support of honourable
gentlemen on the opposite side of the house on
questions relating to the military and naval establishments,
they acted with me because they saw the same danger that
I did, in the diminutiou of those establishments. But the
case on Friday night was • different one, because my hon.
friend had in new the maintenance of the property and
income tax, and he only wished for a modification of it with
a view to its retention, whilst those gentlemen opposite who
voted with him, to the number, 1 'believe, of 200, meant
generally to express by their votes that they wished to limit
It without any modification, and ultimately to do away with
it altugether—(hear, hear)—and I only pointed this out r
a reason why my hon. friend; could not expect that boa
gentlemen opposite would go with him into further
°ppoon. (Hinz hear.) But as this question
will be tubmittref to further inquiry, I trust the
house and country will be sslisfied if it should appear
as the result of this inquiry either that this tax can-
not be made more equitable without either exceedingly
diminishing its amount or making it ten times more ismer
sauna' than it is at present ; or if the house and the twos-
try should not be satisfied in this respect, and if it should
appear to the house and country in general that •modificas
lion of the tax should take place, so as to make it more jar
and equitable, my hon. friend will have a great success—a
certainly
success which I do not envy him—for it is • success
which is fairly due to him, as having made • preposition
which caused this species of tax to be more tolerable to the
country than it is at present. (Hear, hear.) Such is the
course which &c government proposes to take. I wish to
state the matter fairly to the 110011 f, and to aware my lea. 1
friend that the host thing I should think of doing would
be that of evading inquiry. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME quite agreed with the noble lord in the
assumption that supposing his motion should be acceded le
no further alteration of the tai should bo proposed this
Iyear. (Hear, hear.) Whatever the result of the inquiry
should be, and even if it should be found that no immove-
ment could be effected, the country would be satisfied that
everything had been done to remove all the evils of the tax.
He hoped, therefore, that the gallant officer (Colonel Sib-
thorp) who had a motion on the paper fur the relief of •
particular class, would not press it. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI said that after the vote which the house
had come to on Friday night, and after the notification of
the noble lord, that a committee should he appointed to in-
quire into this subject, it appeared to him to be desirable,
that with so short • lease of this tax, there should be so
criticism of its details. (Hear, hear.) There certainly was
one motion, that of his hon. and gallant friend the
for Lincoln, which was deserving of the special earldoms.
tics of the committee, and although perhaps his boa and
gallant friend might not think it altogether desirable Ise
him to take exactly the same course which he meant eels
ginally to have done, yet he hoped that her I;l:Vglihe
I Meters would take into consideration the d .
~ting the principle of that motion, that IMO
farmers of England should be rated in the same =MIR le
the tax as were all other interests. (Hear.) Me tbOgkts
would be quite consistent with the wish not to e
further on the bill to comply with that request. A
regard to the remarks of the noble lord, as to the gesaliely
in the views of the hon. member for Montrose, aid =nee
his aide of the house who supported ea aocioo. he
that they had fully and fairly a camnion of ject in Arr.
It might be that the boa member for Montrose wished the
imams tax to be permission. That certainly wee pet dile
view. Their object was to get rid of the tax,. mt Ong
wished to do so gradually. But when there was wo ikkor
saes of the tax being mar permeeent, or at lend s
tinuity of it, was it not their duty is endeavour to miss
more equitable ?
Lord J. RUSSELL said he weal not wake any
with respect to the latter part of * Criss.
gamines. But with regard to Me that re
govemment might a to tomer*. gisimkk of On
tesant-farmars hum Moire I Mt Ilikkb DA, Oda J.

Vidlaem-17-14000‘.11:141.111lainieer, kw-)
ram W speak, bat
N mid that there was no question before
sags treacles, is elder that the committee
&NM be Wire he he gyeardiage. he should put the
Mike dean lottairesabd, Wad part of the bill.
SIBTHORP said that this was a question which
moth attention. Ile never had shrunk from his
hel he sew mama He wanted to know, there-
bre, alai Obaseeller star Exchequer intended to do
with Res team, amen ?
The MANCELLOR et the EXCHEQUER said that
he ewe& net possibly see what exactly was the object of
his lea, and gallant relative—(laughter)—in asking this
He thought that it had been fully answered by
Crilite Mend the Firm Lord of the Treasury. (Hear,
bear.) It appeared to him that it would be quite fruitless
to dames in the house a subject that was to be discussed in
the committee.
Several motions and amendments having been with-
drawn,
Mr. SPOONER makable& sabeadawents to the following
effect :—" Allowable awl tielaettea from duties under
schedule A to the Mt i mad 6 Vie., a 36, for repairs, and for
rent irrecoverably lied. The repeal of the power of distress
on lands in the cesapetion of a person who was not in the
occupation thereof at the, time the duties, became due.
Giving the power of appeal to persons assessed under
schedule B, either as owners of land in their own occupa-
tion or as tenants, in raped of Imes. Exemptions of per-
sons charged under schedule D and E, whose income is less
than 1 a year, by reason of payment of premium on life
insurance." lie thought his hon. and gallant friend had
acted wisely in not pressing his motion, but he would not
assent to itif he thought the effect would be to fix upon the
farmers • gross injustice for another year. What he (Mr.
Spooner) proposed was, that on an appeal showing either
that the tenant had actually lost, or that the far-
mer had not received any rent, the property tax
should be deducted. If the right hon. gentleman did
not grant the required appeal, the hon. and gallant mem-
ber would, he hoped, renew his motion.
Sir T. D. ACLAND would recommend the Chancellor of
the Exchequer to concede what was asked.
Mr. ALCOCK did not wish to see the farmer exempted
from the payment of income tax on his real profits,
but strongly objected to his being called upon to pay it on
the bens of what the right hon. gentleman arbitrarily stated
to be his income. If the right hon. gentleman did not
make the required concession voluntarily, the house would,
he trusted, compel him to make it.
Mr. BANKLS admitted, that under ordinary circum-
stances it would be reasonable to ask the tenant-farmers to
submit to the tax, without alteration, for another yew; bat
seeing that at the opening of the session their great and
peculiar distress was admitted in the speech from the
throne, and that ministers had since refused any aerie-
ton, he thought the tax ought not to be renewed without some
modification as respected them.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said they
were getting into discussion on the whole principle of
the mode in which the assessment under Schedule It was
made. (Hear, bear.) The truth was, that all the questions
were so linked together that it was almost impossible to deal
with any one of them fairly, and to give it the consideration
which was necessary, and which it deserved, without going
into the whole matter. Ile believed that the farmers of
England paid less in proportion, in ordinary times,
far less than the tradesman paid under Schedule 1).
lion. gentlemen must see that it was hardly possible to
deal with one portion of the subject without entering ,into
the whole. Moreover if the anticipations of hon. gentle-
men opposite were correct, the present state of things
would prove still more favourable to the farmers than it
had been contemplated it would do. No hon. gentleman
would contend that in the long run farmers would not
make something like what was made in ordinary trades ;1
sad the consequence must be that • tax calculated on rent
would be reduced far more rapidly than a tax on theprolits
of trade. If, therefore, the income tax were levied with
reference to rent, that mode of levying would be more to
farmers in time to come than it had been hitherto. The
present mode of assessment, he considered, would be the
best on the whole fur the farmer; and, as • landlord, be
thought the wisest course would be to renew the tease
it stood for a year, and to go into the various questions as
a whole in committee. lie quite agreed that the farmers
had an equitable claim to be put on schedule D ; but,
granting that, logically, he was still of opinion, that it
would be a bad thing fur :the farmers themselves. If he
were to surrender on the one side, he surely ought to be
allowed to surcharge on the other. lie was prepared, how- I
ever, to stand by the arrangement as it stood.
Col. 8111THORP stated that after the discussion that
had taken place, he thought the best course would be to I
withdraw his motion, reserving to himself the power if
discussing the principle on a future OCCWOOII. lle berg.
however, there would be a suspension of financial arrange.
ment until the committee was appointed. (A laugh.)
After some discussion,
Mr. HUME having stated his intention to move for the
committee to-morrow (this day),
Mr. SPOONER stated that he would withdraw his
motion then, to bring it up again on the report.
Clause 1 having been put and agreed to,
Mr. CHAPLIN moved • proviso to the second clause
giving the parties who were assessed under schedule 13 the
same privileges as to appeal, etc., as were given to those
assessed under the other schedules.
The proviso was ultimately withdrawn.
On the motion that clause 2 should stand part of the bill,
Mr. FRESIIFIELI) said he reserved to himself the right
of proposing amendments in a future stage.
The clause was then agreed to, as were clauses 3 and 4.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
two last clauses were unnecessary, as the bill was only for
one year.
Mr. J. B. SMITH moved the addition of the following
clauses: "That all appointments to any offices authorised
to be made by Local Commissioners of Property Tax
shall be subject to revision by the Lords Commissioners
of Her Majesty's Treasury. That no appointment to
any office under the provisions of this act shall
be made of persons under twenty-one years of age."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
the clauses had better not be pressed, as the whole of these
questions would doubtless come before the select committee.
The clauses were then withdrawn.
Mr. MACGREGOR said that in consequence of the
Course taken by her Majesty's government, with which he
was perfectly satisfied, he begged altogether to withdraw
the amendments of which he had given notice.
The bill then passed through committee, and the house
resumed.
In reply to Mr. Srooßra,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was
not his intention on to-morrow (this day) to raise a discus-
sion by bringing up the report.
ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES ASSUMPTION BILL.
The further consideration of this bill was postponed to
Friday next.
SUPPLY.—OFFICIAL SALARIES.
Oa the motion for going into committee of supply,
Lord J. RUSSELL said ho had already promised that
when this motion was made, he would state to the house
the views the government had taken of the report of the
special committee on salaries. After stating that they did
not propose any alteration in offices of great importance,
the committee proceeded to the consideration of the ap-
pointments to the treasury ; and their first recommendation
was, that the lords of the treasury should receive 1,0001. a
year, instead of 1,200/. ; and that the two secretaries to
the treasury should receive 2,0001. a year each, instead of
2,5001. The government agreed to that recommendation.
The committee did not propose any alteration in the sala-
ries of the secretaries of state. They said that the office of
Committee of Privy Council had duties of great importance
annexed to it on the subject of education, and they did not
think • salary of 2,0001. a year to the persons holding
that high office was an extravagant sum, or that it ought to
be reduced. They recommended that the railway duties, as
was in contemplation, might be again discharged by the
Board of Trade, and that steps be taken to consolidate the
railway department with the Board of Trade. The
President of that board (Mr. Labouchere), looking at the
extent of the duties, had come to the conclusion that tho
business might be done with the saving proposed by the
committee, and therefore the railway commiouoners would
no longer be separate from the railway committee. The
next question he would take in connexion with two
other questions namely, the salary of the Presi-
dent of the Bt:ard of Trade, which they recommended
should be united with the salary of the Paymaster of the
Forces, that these two offices should be conjoined, and that,
instead of 2,0001. a year for each, the salary should be
1,5001. for the joint office. They recommended that the
office of Lord Privy Seal should be joined with some other
offices, and that there should be no salary attached to the
holding of the privy seal. With regard to the Master of
the Mint, they recommended that that office shlvoc:,iiguilylretotbeotoandaynanityo
longer held by a salaried officer. In considering these ques-
tions, the government had endeavoured to comply, as far es
was consistent, with the recommendations of the committee,
but, at the tam: time, there were important considerations
laid before the committee by Sir R. Peel and by other pee-
sow having great experience in public affairs, to wham, the
committee did net seem to have paid any attention la dab
recommendations. It certainly appeared to him (Lad J.
Russell) that it was of advantage as • general proposition
that there should be some member of the government whom
Ales should not be of so laborious a nature that he should
piniciagaotweistionsholseh.adblarodkearitodipialihargpswhie:cet,huoeethdidantehsrddtsouththattiteesrop.
rowiflpeetrerwthiyafroseybeomb
AbLisedr.proligewywdet.taromlay_apecatbhtiytefetwainseitdoetlmithaizWaiy:etCletreter.rveopeuweimaityatf4th.thandwooritelial..7:reeo;°:amvertttatirpeie-d-itieri,i47dire:
hoilbehatear to hold were se mai mere
aim& Now, beam
beeisese Ilia they heel been at kiwi an.
esilaimiliriudnamadbomiy-iiie i 4111.1 thsbaisairaat =y very
. Imla 1F11°.!
maa-,auelt. he breerree, sodoa seguelties et the
sad the merlegee culture- na Ida& wee uater his
ova erraheerisa whoa he wes Papuan of the Forces—
!** eadeadoil last if they had set seem Aber of the go-
verment win* timid slog to throe affairs it was hardly

dfive am
ecision gpbo
one reason for net eutireli
iho-
anly a little labour was attached.
Ant very frequently there were per-
ery great attention to public affairs,
entered office at a time of life and in •
state of health which precluded them from accepting any
very laborious duties. At the same time such persons
might be of the greatest service in assisting with
their advice and opinions. It might be said that
their assistance might be secured by giving them
• nominal office without any salary attached. That
might be true with regard to persons of consi-
derable fortune. Persons who kept establishments in
London might accept one of these great offices and nut re-
ceive any salary; but he thought that would be a very
bad principle to adopt in the public service of this coun-
try. (Hear, hear.) The tendency of any such alteration
would be to make office attainable and compatible only
with persons of very considerable fortune. He held that
to bo • great evil. Hear, hear.) If they said that persons
of moderate fortune should not be able to hold any great
offices in the state, but that they must be given to
men of very considerable fortune, an impediment
would be put in the way of talent, in the
way of men of the highest abilities, who perhaps devoted
their time in this and the other house of parliament, but
who could not afford to take those offices without a salary.
If any man would look at the course of official life in this
country, he would perceive that offices in the cabinet had
been held by persons of different pursuits,who ventured into
politics with some wish to take part in the service of
their country, but whose natural occupations were to live
in the country in the enjoyment of their property, and in
the pursuit of sources of amusement, and in the perform-
ances of other duties. lie might mention, for instance, the I
Lord Privy Seal, and the Luke of Buccleugh, and others '
of great fortune—men, who could hardly be expected to
leave entirely their other duties and enjoyments, in order
to devote their time and unremitting labour to one of these
offices. But, it was a great advantage to unite with official
life men of those habits ; and if we had a set of men devoted
to offiessand office alone, without an admixture of others en-
smeasionally different pursuits and mingling with their
it would be a great alteration for the worse.
(Soar, heir.) Therefore, in corning to a conclusion
sa bum points, the government had so far agreed with the
amnitlee that he proposed to separate that which
haft oat been sepuated for • very long tinse—
ls, swat the office of master of the Mint altogether from
*Wog life ; and had her Majesty's permission to offer
that Wise to Sir John Henschel', he being connected with
science mil the holder of a distinguished name. (Cheers.)
Therefore, the office of master of the Mint would no longer
be as it had been, apolitical office,as held by Mr. Tierney,nor
would it be combined with the Pnsident or Vice-President
a the Board of Trade, as it was in the case of Mr. Glad-
stone and Mr. Labouehvre. The office of paymaster of the
faeces was formerly an office of very great emolument, and I
was held by Lord Chatham. lie (Lord J. Rumen)
proposed to continue the office of paymaster f the
brous with that of Vice-president of the Board of Trade,
but when the two offices were combined he did not propose
an increase of salary ; on the contrary, he proposed, in ac-
cordance with the recommendation of the committee, •
diminution of 5001. in the salary of the office. The office
must be held by one of considerable political importance ;
mg as the Presideut of the Board of Trade sat iu that
Imre, and the vice-president of the board in the other,
WAlllk lithe duties of the office might be discharged in the
Lank The government did nut propose to abolish
the office of Lord Privy Seal, because they
aossidered its maintenance necessary. No proposal
had been made by the committee with regard to the office
of Secretary at War; and therefore he would pass on to
notice that they recommended that the Judge Advocate
should have only 1,5001. • year instead of 2,0001.; nail
this reduced salary would commence on the next appoint-
ment to tho office. With regard to the Admiralty, they
proposed that the salaries act the junior lords should he
I,OOW. instead of 1,2001. a year, and that those who now
had 1,0001., with residences, should reside in those resi-
dences. The government were of opinion that there was
great convenience in the lords having residences at the
Admiralty, and they proposed to reduce the salaries of
those who had not residences to 1,0001. a year, and to con-
tinue the residences to those who already possessed them.
With regard to the Chief Secretary for Ireland, the com-
mittee recommended a reduction of his salary at the close of
the present parliament of front 5,500/. to 3,0001. per annum.
This reduction was unquestionably connected with the aboli-
tion of the office of lord lieutenancy. of Ireland. lie did not
think it necessary to enter upon the question of that aboli-
tion at present, as it must before long conic under the con-
sideration of the house ; but if the office was maintained,
he had no hesitation in saying it would be right to make
sumo reduction in the salary of the Chief Secretary.',
(Boar.) The committee next proposed that the duties of secre-
tary of the poor-law board be performed for 1,0001. n-year
instead of 1,21101., and the government assented to that pro-
position. With regard to judicial salaries there were
considerations of very great importance which must
not be overlooked. Ile held that the persons to
be placed in the highest offices in the judicial es-
tablishments should be men of great eminence, high
legal reputation, and of foremost standing at the
bar. Ile was now alluding to such offices u that of
Lord Chancellor, the Chief Justices, the Master of the
Rolls, and others of that description. It had been argued
in the committee that there were men of very sound judg-
ment and competent learning who might be quite as lit to
be placed in the highest judicial situations as those who
were foremost at the bar. '!'here was no doubt that men of
that description might be found. But he did not think it'
desirable as a rule that the ancient practice of promoting
men of the greatest eminence to those high offices
should be departed from. (Hear, hear.) It was for
the government still to continue to appoint men
to vacancies whom they believed to be possessed of
sound judgment and competent learning—who had
run an arduous race of legal competition, and who had been
successful. It was quite obvious that men who have done
this must be men of colutide ruble talent. Besides in looking back
at the men who had been successful as Attorney-Generals

or who had gained great eminence at the bar--sueh for in-
stance as Lord Camden, Lord Hardwick, Lord Eldon, and
Lord Mansfield—it could not be thought that the country
had been a loser by the practise of choosing from the most
popular and distinguished men of the time. But if they
had these eminent persons, they could not expect to obtain
their services unless their salaries were somewhat commen-
surate with their gains at the bar, because many of them
had to make some provision for their families, and it would
be a great public misfortune and a reproach to the country,
if their families, owing to the diminished means of the
judges, were reduced to privation. It appeared by the
evidence of Chief Justice Wilde, now Lord Chancellor,
that there were at present about eight gentlemen at
the bar making about 8,0001. a-year, and 24 leaders
making about 5,0001. a-year. He (Lord J. Russell)
proposed by his Court of Chancery Bill, that the salary of
the Lord Chancellor, which was now 10,0001. a year from
one source, and 4,0001. from another, should in future be re-
duced to 10,0001. a year. Thecommittee had proposed a re-
duction in the salary of the Master of the Rolls from 7,0001. to
6,0001. a year, and the government acceded to that pro-
posal. He proposed that the salaries of the chief justices
should be the same as those contained in the bill of last
year, vie., that the Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench
should receive 8,0001. a year, the other Chief Justice and
the Chief Baron 7,0001. a year, and the twelve palm°
judges 5,0001. • year. Tho committee recommended
that the Vice-Chancellor should have 5,0001. a year,
and the masters in Chancery 2,0001. • year each.
Considering the important duties performed by the Masters
in Chancery it had not been thought advisable to make any
change at present; the salary, at present, being '2,5001. •
year. The salaries, he thought, had formerly been 3,0001.
and 3,5001. a year. At the same time it was to be borne in
mind with regard to Masters in Chancery that the whole
question of Chancery reform was under consideration, anfl
that there might be or might not be some change recom-
mended in respect to those officers; and ter those
reasons, among others, he did not see that it was
desirable to effect any change just at this mo-
ment. Of course all the changes to which ho
was now alluding were changes that would not affect per-
sons who had been appointed to offices before the com-
mencement of the present year. The committee recom-
mended a scale of salaries for Scotland and Ireland, which
would boa diminution to a certain amount, bat not to any
very large amount, and from which but • very small saving
would accrue to the public, and which, he owned, he did
not think it at all expedient should be made. The same
observation applied both to Scotland and Ireland, but more
especially to Scotland. Referring to Lord Palmerston for
tulles. explanations, Lord J. Russell outlined the changes
proposed is the diplomatic service, by which the British re-
presentative at Paris—to whom it was judged politic to
continue the dignity of ambassador—was to have his 10,0001.
a year cut down to 8,0001. Turkey, also, was still to have
an ambassador, in whose income no change was designed.
The ambassador at 'Vienna had already been turned into
an envoy, and some retrenchment thereby effected. To
' the proposition to unite in one the various German
missions, he found a temporary objection in the distracted
state of continental polities, but thought it possible
to dispense with one of the missions now main-
tained in Italy, and suggested that the minister now at
Florence might fulfil the duties of diplomatic envoy at'
Rome if an official intercourse was established between the
court of St. James's and the Vatican. Lord J. Russell con-
eluded by describing the innumerable labours, cares, and
anxieties inevitable to the due performance of high public
i dutie., and submitted that the national interests were far
more deeply concerned in having the work done well than
done cheaply. it was not so much the salary so the service
on which • real benefit to the public might be secured.
, Mr. URQUHART expressed his pleasure that the com-
mittee had at length enforced from the government some
reduction in the diplomatic expenditure; thinking, at the
same time, that it had not gone far enough.
Ms. COBDEN pereeived that it was not the intention of
government to take • discussion that night; and as he
believed no members of the committee, with the exception
of the member foe West Surrey (Mr. R. Drummond) and
himself, were then puessut, it would, perhaps, be better to
reserve all comment ma the statement made by the noble
I lord until emit ether alladklel. He must say that ho was
greatly Mat is large a proportion of the recom-
mendatiome of the monasitleo had been rejected. In respect
especially to the diplomatic branch of the service of the
country, he had looked for great reductions. It was gene-
rally.felt bythe house that unless reductions took place
in that direction; it was u•eless to hope for them in regard to
the civil service ; and ho thought that the statement of
the noble lord was directly in the face of the evidence
taken before the eommittee. Russia was generally sup)

yinklie:
THE EXPRESS, TUESDAY El,
siolAY 8, 1851,
. , . ." .4., -f;\ Ai.-, Naohi4 •
~ • .
I would therapre 50 the ' 4lsthit al/ salsa
•. • "eStrimarairalf. marten
soh; the kind pa
• -- .., T;.....L.. , .
order that *h itiiiellos _ speed it • thee.* to be ' 4.. by_ en Aker end then brought nail
atasts
esawoxii,== hitt
.. la the tftemit-feamsre awn the On coasration of 'the members of the &MN
; rt ear ham)) It aril ilsbr mitifi tuts At 'beset would be fully qualified to . give i
- \ it, • . so as to have a moderatimend right dean= gki
thdrawn with leave. ' asswed in the OM 211110111 IN 6111101 and pro *ere rqtareition. Such was one reason for net entirely ab
mated his petition, which assessed. Dot that woe a falleer with respect which fishing offices to which only a little labour was attache
• vote& there was eiringienelin filantlemin ologinios--(hear, hear)— Another reason was that very frequently then were pe
)MB TAX BILL. sad therellee be ilierold lit see d& be store proper to have sons who had paid very great attention to public argil
Le into committee on this it oonsifinrei log It• limilikle•.. 4 impezz, than that it and who perhaps entered office at a time of life and is
.