The Express.
London, England, 1850-08-06 00:00:00

avast of British shippiog cootinutag to be objected to these
differeatial dada, input ha foes lb of the aet of
last swift for repea the Na Laws, by levying
differential dad.' es the ships of In Ms pens et this
kingdom and its lependaneles.
Lord PALMS TON replied that the 'ablest had en-
gaged the Attention of goverment for some roan past,
and eromenniestime had mend between them sod the
goverameat of Spas, which were neeseserily suspended
during the period of the simpensica of diplommis rehabs'
with the country. They would sow be resuresd, and he
was sure the boom weld Ise that ft was not advisable to
lay the papers es the table of the home. With regard to
the Spanish gevernseent rot choosing to miens, the duties
or to admit British shipping en the sane terms as Spanish
nese* be was sore the noun would feel that it was not de- I
sirehle that he should state at prerent the course government
would sea Si In take.
Mr. ANDERSON mid at the beginning of next ses-
sion of parliament he should move the following resolu-
tion on the subject:
That the skips of apsia having dace the year 1124 been permitted
to import goons the produce or manufacture of Spain Into the port of
the United Kingdom. at the same rates ef duty as British shim, and
vino the Ist January Me the eurylag trade ef the United Kingdom
and its dependrecke to aid from ill ether mientres having been
opened to lowish vends es the sone terms as to Brttbh vessels
whereas, am ing the while of these periods higher rates deludes have
been. end continue to lee, levied on goods when haportad Into or en-
parted truce tipain sad its dependencies to British weeds then in
Uppish newts. to the great detrinster. of British shipowners and the
obstruction of Weds, a budge address be preseMed to her Majesty,
praying that her Majesty will be grsoloody pinged, be virtue ul the
power vested to her by est It k IS Viet, esp. 29, to exam snob rates
of duty to be levied on the Importation so esistion of goods in
:cosolobmvaessey mils,aet ports of thei United Kingdom
duties tisit/ein the
porta of Spain on British vessels.
STAMP DUTIES BILL,
•-•

The boom the;;;llintocoinmttteoWiltie hill.
Mfr. HENLEY asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to
elate what alterations It, had made in the bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER timid that
he thought the more convenient course that he should state
the alterations when he came to the schedule. He stated it
the laic time, and they got into interminable confu-
sion, the clauses and the schedules were so totally
diatinct. At the same time, if it was corm-
nieot to the house, be would state it now. The first
alteration that be Proposed was that the act should take effect
from the 10th of October instead of the bth of July.
The first four clause, were than agreed to, with some
verbal amendments.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated, in
reply to a question Iron Mr. Nsrina, that a sortgestion had
been made to him from Ireland regarding a difficulty which
would arise in that country, and he proposed to bring up a
clause to set that matter right.
Clauses 6 and 6 were then agreed to.
On clause 7, which gives the crown the power to recover
from solicitors money paid to them by parties fer stamps, in
we they reelect or twit to pay them,
Mr. MULLINGS proposed to insert the word " fraudu•
Indy." He thought it this word were not inserted innocent
persons might be made to suffer. The crown would still have
the power of eslliog on the parties liable to the duty. It
would be a very bard care to make a solicitor a crown debtor
when after he had r.ceived the money he was served with
notice countermanding the directions to pay the stamp

_
duty.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said this
clues stood exactly as it passed io the farmer bills. The
point was rais,cl end discussed, and it was settled that it
should pus as it stood now. It was intended to meet the
case of a pstt psylog money over to a solicitor, and the
solicitor detaining the money.
Mr. MULLINO4 said it wee in consequence of what took
place on the lest occasion that hie attention was drawn to the

po. rt.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL said the word " fratiu-
lent " that it was proposed to introduce wee really not
depirahle. The object was to make the person liable who
bed received the money sad sot paid it over. It not en.
:eminently happened that after the term of a great num..er
of }ran the etaluire.dlice proceeded agailat the cie non who
was originally liable fir the stamp duty, the legacy ant
probate duty, which the party believed had been paid,
because ea account of it had been delivered en his eolici-

toed bill.
Mr. HENLEY said the word " improperly " might be in-
serted. As the chaise rood, the mere omission for an hour

to pay over the duty made a man a crown debtor.
The ATTOUNEYHENERAL should not object to the
word " improperly," but he thought the clause would be
better without it, because an attorney who rece.ved the
money was a nova debtor it he neglected for an hour to
pay the money over.
Mr. HENLEY thought the word "improperly" ought to
be inserted.
In reply to Mr. Wirrone,
The ATTORN EY-OHN ERAL said that the insertion of
the word " improperly" would be destructive of the effect
of the clause.
The amendment was withdrawn.
On clause 8 being Clad,
Mr. M CLLINGS said that the clause provided that when
the transfer of a mortgage with a further sauce of money
should be made by the person originally b_nowing, then the
duty should he the 5402 C as on the original mortgage. lie
proposed an amendment to eweect that.
The ATTORNEY•GENERAL said that it was, in fact,
a new transaction and a new mortgage. Ile thought the
proposal of the member for Cirencester was not admissible
in this clause.
After a few words from Mr. Cardwell, Mr. Walpole, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, end Mr. Mulltng%
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL mainteiotd that there
could be no question about the construction of tots elause.
It was necesaary, whenever taxes were imposed, t.e provide
against venous attempts at evasion.
After some observaeions by Sir .1 GRAHAM,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. premised
to undenthe to consider the matter, and the amendment
wa. withdrawn.;
Clauses 9, 10, and 11 were agreed to.
Clause 12, duty on conveyances, being moot:teed,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
he had promised to make a statement of the elavation of
duty which he proposed to rock. on canvey: nese.
All partie, agreed now that the duty on mortgage
should be unifo-mly 8 per cent. The less was
such that it was impossible, with the views which he then
entertained, to give the boon which he had originally mei-
, posed. and therefore he reduced the duty to a uni.oren one
ewe cent. throughout. Oae of the first results of that was to
bring to his knowledge the modes of evading the payment of
duty in ease of the tweet'. of law shares. By
dietetic; the shares they evaded the duty to a very
great amount. According to the existing law, the duty
upon a transfer of 1001. was 121. By his prop( sel he reduced
it to 111. ; and certainly he was under the happy delusion,
concurred in by all partite, that they were traustening pro-
perty of 'slue; but he found by a process, arieirg from
the power of dividing, and the exceeding inconvenience and
injustice of the present scale of stamp dudes, that parties
transferred property which they could divide on the
payment of 71. 104., instead of 121. By niriding
1,6001. into two sums of 4991. and 21. each
they paid 61. 10 t. ; to that all honeet people—
[an honourable Minthea—" All foolish people." (A
laugh.)J supposed they were paying 121. The
law provided that the transfer of all kinds of property should
pay the same amount of duty. Gentlemen who were tsaris-
t • g property which was easily divisible Lilly paid
61. 10.. If they had divided it into two sums of 5001.,
the actual expense would be more than the original soul.
Us had been throughout exceedingly anxious to reduce
the duty upon conveyance-. Re was rot very confident
of what the probable amount of revenue would be ; he
was happy to sty that since that time the revenue had
increased mote than he could have expected, and when tie
took not so sanguine a view as he was now entitled to do.
By postponing till the 10th October the commencement of
the act, the operation of the act would nut tak place
during the half year of the present year. The lug of
duty in the present year was 40,0001. lie apprehended
that the loss for next quarter might Ds as much.
Ile proposed to reduce the duty on conveyances eltoge they
to onelialf per cent. from one per ant. The whole bill
would then have the effect of causing a yearly loss of about
500,0001. For the present year, up to the 10th of October,
the bill would make a 100 to the amount of 330,000/. The
surplus, then, at the end of the year, assuming that no
other reductions would take place, would be 1,547,0001.
Out of that he would be left the available amount
of 761,0001., so that at the end of the year he would be
11,0001. better than he supposed. In order to confer
the boon which would be granted by these reduction.
he was compelled to refuse to support the bill
on Irish spfrits, as well as the bill to re-
peal the duty on &Renzi's' cartilicates. Ilm; the
attornies received greater benefit by this bill, than they
would by the bill for the repeal of those duties. His nex
proposal was to reduce the duty on the admission to copyhold
estates to half-a-crown. He also proposed to reduce the duty
on all duplicates and charter parties. By these reductions
the loss of 500,0001. would be annually caused to the ex-

chequer.
The clause was then agreed to, as were the others of
the be 11.
On the schedule being taken into consideration,
Mr. OROGAN moved that the words" award in Eng-
land or Ireland, and award or decret arbitral in Scotland,"
should be inserted after the clause as to agreement, and be-
fore the clause as to bond.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER objected,
saying that awards were totally foreign from the principles
of the 101.
It was negatived without a division.
The clause as to bond in the schedule was then agreed to.
Oa the clause as to oonveysnoe being prop ised,
Mr. CARDWELL said that, though he agreed with the'
bill inasmuch as it carried out the principle of an ad rabrens
duty, and was not at all opposed to the principle of reducing
the duty on conveyances tram 11. to 104., yet ho could not
allow the statement of the right hon. gentlemen to the eft. at
that he calculated the lose to the Exchequer, by that reduc-
tion, as amounting to 300,0001., and that he was
',dog to leave in the Exchequer after that loss the
soin of 761,0001., to pass without observing that
to his opinion, that was not the proper way of making the
ativesant. The balance-sheet would be laid on the table
before them in a few days, and then they would sae what
was in the Treasury. Supposing the sum to be larger, it was
note reason why they should be leis careful as to the balance
which they should have In the Exchequer. It was on the
ground of the statement which the Chaacellor of the Exche-
quer bad made on a former oocaaion that he voted with him
against the removal of the duty on attornies' certificates. In
snaking this change there was a audios of 600,0001. instead
of 300,0001,
The clause affecting the duty on ambition to oopyhold
estates was then agreed to.
Several other stems in the schedules were gone through,
sad wood to without amendment.