The Express.
London, England, 1853-07-26 00:00:00

On clause 34, which imposes the duty on the successor to
the full amount of the property, although a part of it might
have been previously eaten up by encuntheauee,
The Earl of DERBY said he was not going to move en
amendment on this clause, which would not be received by
their lordship', but he could not allow it to pass with Out
pointing out its manifest injustice. If a man succeeded to
an estate of 20,0001. a year, of which all but 6,0001. had
been anticipated abd eaten up by the encumbrances of the
predecessor, be wu taxed not on the 5,0001. which he did re-
ceive, but on the amount which he might receive but did not
receive. If the property had been actually parted with to
the same amount, instead of being mortgaged, the tax could
not be levied, and, therefore, it seemed to be the grossest
injustice to levy it when, to all intents and purposes, it was
parted with as -far as the successor was concerned.
Earl GRANVILLE said that it was impossible to legis-
late so as to meet every possible case that might arise. But
if they once admitted the principle of exemptions like this,
it would be likely to lead to great evasion of the duty. For
instance, a man with an estate of the capital value of
120,0001. might make a colourable mortgage of 100,0001., so
that the duty would be paid only on 20,0001.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE said that a man may raise
money on the reversion even for legitimate purposes, invest-
ing it in trade, for instance, and under such circumstances,
was be to he exempt although be might be getting 10 or 15
Per cent. on the money so invested?
The Earl of DERBY said that in that case the duty would
be paid both on the money invested on the trade, and on
the property on which it was botroeed.;
After a few words from Lord Truro, the Earl of liar-
rowby, Earl Granville, and the Earl of Malmesbury,
The LORD CHANCELLOR said there was a body called
the Reversionary Fund Society, whose business it was to
purchase up reversions; and it was singular, if this clause
involved so much injustice, that not • single word of com-
plaint had been beard from that body. (Hi ar, hear.)
The clause was then agreed to, as were the following
clauses up to clause 48.
On clause 49,
The LORD CHANCELLOR stated, in answer to Lord
Hardwick, tnat the disclosing of confi iential information
received under the provisions of this act, would be treated
as a misdemeanour. Allusion had been made to the case

of the Newcastle corporation Icuing 7,0001. a year, by the
production of their title deeds in • court of law ; but the
fact was, they lost it because it
(Hear, hear.)
After a conversation, in which the Earl of ?SALIM-
BURT, Earl GRANVILLE, and other peers took part, the
clause was agreed to.
On clause 54,
The Earl of MALMESBURY wished to know why the
bill was to operate from the 19th of May. Was it the
Chancellor of the Exchequer's birthday ? (Laughter.)
Earl GRANVILLE said a few words in reply, and the
clause was then armed to.
The Earl of DERBY was understood to state, in the con-
fusion caused by most of the peers leaving the house, that
he should not press his nmendmeat for restricting the ope-
ration of the act to five years.
The remaining clauses were agreed to, after a valedictory
protest from the Earl of ILtagowny against the " injus-
tice " of the bill, which elicited a short reply from the
LORD CHANCFLLOR and Lord TRURO. _

The house then resumed, the bill was reported, end the
third reading fired fora subsequent day.

COLONIAL CHURCH REGULATION BILL.
This bill was read s third time and passed.
MISSIONARY BISHOPS BILL.

The Bishop of OXFORD moved the second reading of
this bill. Its object was to authorise the placing of a
bishop at the head of the foreign missions of the Church
of England.
Earl Powis, the Earl of Malmesbury, the Bishop of Salis-
bury, and the Marquis of Salisbury, having expressed their
opinions on the bill—
The Earl of ABERDEEN expressed a fear that the bill
might lead to very serious inconveniences. At the same
time, the protection required for the bishops would be no
greater than for the missionaries.
After • few words from the Earl of MALMISBURT and
the Bishop of Oxeunc, the bill was read a second time, and
ordered to be committed.

Their lordships then adjourned, at 10 minutes to 12
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-MONDAY, JULY 25.

The S took the chair at I o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Lords' amendments to the foliating bills were con-
siAered and agreed to : British Electric Telegraph Com-
pany ; London and North Western Railway (Northamp-
ton. tic.) ; London and North Western Railway (St.
Albans, &el ; West Harptry Road ; Bills.
The Banbridge, Dublin, Newry, and Belfast Junction
Railway Bill; the Galway Improvement Bill; and the
Warrington and Altrineham Junction Railway (Warring-
ton) Bill were read a third time and passed.
The Duke of latholl's Estate Bill and Treffry's Estate Bill
were read a second time and ordered to be committed.