The Express.
London, England, 1850-04-16 00:00:00

the erOVeoo.

OUTGOING MAILS.
Tke West Iselin Mal* excluding Baratda, Hamm*
Awn, Ilfr.diuse, Now Orleans, and Minim, and Mikan,
them for Madeira, St. Jean-de-Nlopereipak New Granada,
Chili, and Pere, will be made .p to-morrow morning.
Tito malls kr Lisbon, Spain, end Gibraltar will be made
ap to-m-irrow merniag.
The mails for British North Amnia and the United
States will be made up on the evening of April 19.
The mails fir Gibraltar, Malta, OTtelle. the lonia. Islands,
Sept, Ceylon, India, and China. oda Ileathampton, will
ne made up en the morning of April SO.
The maSe MS Marseilles, to the Mediterranean, Egypt,
C. Om, DIEN Honr-Kong, its., will be made up on
the evening of April 24.
The smile for Madera, the Braille, mid Buenos Ayres, will
mi made ap on the 4th of May.

111101 WATIIIi AT LOMMOIt BRITOIL
ran Dal —Wawa& 4I Aftsmoce.
to- ssesow—Navisles. Atiannes. la.

LONDON, TUESDAY, APEIL 16.

Thu " temper of the house" last night was not
agreeable. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
it, and he felt it. Schedule Bof his new Stamp Bill
met with an untimely fate. The house, after con-
senting to repeal the existing stamp laws, decided by
a majority of 164 to 13.5 against the government not
to adopt Sir CHARLES WooD.B new scheme. "In
the present temper of the house," said the CHANCEL-
LOR of the E'en MUER, "I shall decline proceeding
any farther with the bill."
The decision of the houie was elicited by an
amendment which sufficiently attests the feeling of
the legislature. The CHANCELLOR of the Excite-
QUER originally proposed an ad valorem duty of 1
per cent on bonds. Last night he proposed to re-1
duce that 1 per cent to I. It was argued that this
was too high a rats of duty, that one tenth per cent.,
or Is. on 601., was quite enough. The amendment,
embodying the principle fw which we have been
arguing the last Urn • weeks, was carried against mi-
Dieters last night by a mcjoriry of 29. There is every
reason to believe that this m irning the nmee, which
has hitherto been intensely silent on the suhject, will
discover that Sir CHARLES WOOD was decidedly in
the wrong, and deserved to have been beaten
thoroughly.
The main point oflast night'sdebste was the good faith
of the CHANCELLOI of the Excniuma. He proposed
his mesas» with a simple intention of giving the tax-
payer the benefit of 300,0001. He appropriated that
amount of revenue to the public. How were they to get
the btneflt of that very dr sirable remission of taxation ?
Would they have g t it under the new bill? Those
were the questions the CHANCELLOR was last night
called upon to answer, and he was utterly unable to
offer a reply.
The CHANCELLOR of the Excneaueit was asked
to give the house the data upon which he bad
arrived at the conclusion that the loss to the revenue
by the alteration of the stamp duties would amount to
the sum he proposed to give the public. The CnAlt-
CILLott replied that he had gone on no data: " all his
calculations were matter of mere estimate." He was
assisted in his speculations by "a very able official
from the &amp-office." They had laid their heads
together, and had come to the conclusion that they
should not lose 1, es than 270,0001. A few nights ago
Mr. HENLEY asked the Secretary of the Treasury to
give the Hoase an account of the cumber of stamps
annuelly issued from the Stamp-office, according to
their respective values. Mr. HATTER said that no
such account was ki pt. Lig n ght the ATTORNEY-
GENERAL came down with a partial account
of this tort, upon which he based an argument that
the lose to the revenue would amount to the sum pro-
posed to be appropriated. Mr. HENLEY felt himself
entitled to remark, that ha had either been very
much deceived or that the ATTORNEY-GINERAL mu
using a document to which not the slightest authority
attached.

Bat there did come out a fact last night calculated
in the strongest manner to confirm the general opi-
nion, that the revenue, Vatead of losing, would have
gained greatly by the intended alterations. It appeared
that the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in con-
rultation with the Chairman of the Board of Inland
Revenue, had come to the conclusion that he bad
pitched the new rate of ad ral,riht duty upon bonds
atd mortga;es too high. He, thereh.re, proposed
another alteration, an additional change, a third
Stamp Duties Bill,—in which he reduced the mini-
mum rate of stamp duty on mortgages and bonds to
34. instead of 10s. He calculated that by this altera-
tion, announced for the first time last night, he should
lose—how much ? Something more than 30,000/. ! So
that, as Mr. 001:LBURN reminded the bowie, a reduc-
ti nof no less then 50 per cent, upon every transac-
tion under the head of mortgages and bonds through-
out the empire was only estimated to entail a sacrifice
of 30.0001. And yet it was in the face of this fact that
the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQLER assumed that his
new scale, which greatly increased every rate of duty
on transactions above 1,000!., would cause a loss to the
revenue of more than half • million !

It happen., unfortunately for the CHANCELLOR of
the Excneetunt, that there is one particular stamp
duty, the produce of which to the revenue happens
to be known. The 154 stamp upon mortgages pro-
duces an average of 4,5001. a year, representing a sale
of precisely 300 stamps. Under the new Stamp MI
a transaction of 12,5004, which is now represented by
a 151. stamp, would pay an ad valorem duty of
821. 10s. 621. 10s. multiplied by 300 produces
18,7301. Upon this single stamp alone there would
betherefore an increase of revenue amounting to no
less than 14,230/. a year, or more than 300 per cent. !
Is not this a proof of the arose delusion under which
this measure was propounded as a measure to remit
taxation ?

The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQC ER pointed to the
reduction of duty upon rates below 1,0001., and said
that he expected a loss from the remission upon these
small trafisaetionr. What is the CHANCELLOR of the
Exclutut:Ea's notion of " transactions ?" Dow he
call a hoed for 1,6001. or 2 0001. a large transac-
tion ? Does he call a 6,0001. or even a 10,0001. mort-
gage a large transaction? Oa these, and all such
considerations u these, the proper stamp duties
would have effected an enormous increase. The CHAN-
CELLOR of the EXCHEQUER well knows that the great
bulk of transactions would have come under the in-
creased stamp rates. If he had any doubt upon the
subject he would have given the house the ietarn of
stamps at their respective values, of which Mr.
Harris denied the ex'stence, but upon which it
NEM/ that Sir C. WOOD made his "calculations."

The house last night showed a greet desire to re-
mit taxation, but no disposition to adopt it up3n false
pretenc.e. " Thi■ plan," said one hon. gentleman,
" ought to have been propounded to us candidly and
fairly." The government wronged the public by
promising a boon and offerisg a stamp. The country
was promised relief; but if this measure gave any
relief at all, it did it by taxing one class in order to
relieve another. Although the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER had struck out all the objectionable
clauses which im;.osed new taxation, it was very
conclusively shown last n;ght that there still re-
mained in the bill numerous items of new taxation,
which are not objected to, bat which would hive assur-
edly produced additional revenue. To talk of any loss,
therefore, from the operation of the new scale of
duties was simply ridiculous ; and so the House of
Commons treated the CHANCELLOR'S assertions.

The House this evening will be called upon to
consider a motion long since placed upon the
piper by Mr. Mimosa GIBSON for the repeal
of the duties on newmpapere and knowledge. When
the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was asked
last night what he intended to do with his
surplus, he was at the same time reminded that
the question of taxation upon knowledge was
within a few hours to be submitted for consideration.
It would have been a graceful and a popular act had
Sir CHARLES WOOD, in his Budget for the present
year, made concession of at least a portion of theme
taxes. A sacrifice of the 150,0001. lie receives upon'
Advertisements might have saved him much of the
trouble Le bas slice uoderipme in appropriating the
surplus of the year's taxation. He made, however,
his own choice. The consequences he expi rierced in
Let night's division; and in the dienssion which will
follow it to-night, he loses the advantage of the only
argument that ought to be effectual against a remis-
sion of such taxes—namely, that there remairs in the
Exchequer no surplus to divas, of.

Tne existing Briti,h government will leave behind
it no Mere honourable monument of its attachment to
' the cause of constitutional and moderately libtral pro-
gress in Europe, than tl:e pirliamentary column*,
containing the carrispoodenoe eland with itad.ploniatio