The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-18 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 17.
The House reiumed at Six o'clock.
PETITIONS.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON presented a petition
from the West Indies, complaining of the distressed
state of her sugar manufactures.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from the linen-
weavers of Montrose, complaining of their distressed
state; also from the shipping owners of Montrose,
praying for the repeal of the passing toll at Ramsgate
Barbour.

THE AUSTRALIAN COLONIES.
Lord NAAS rose to present a petition from the Le-
gislative Council of New South Wales, expressing great
dissatisfaction with the Act 13 and 14 Victoria, relating
to that colony. The Noble Lord was about to state the
substance of the petition, when
Mr. GLADSTONE suggested that, in consequence of
its great importance, the petition should be read by the
Clerk at the table.

The Clerk accordingly proceeded to read the petition,
but in so low a tone of voice as to bo almost inaudible.
As far as we could gather, the following was the import
of the document:—The petitioners stated that they felt
it their duty to themselves, their constituencies, and
posterity, to record their deep disappointment at the
consequences entailed upon the colony by the Act 13
and 14 Victoria. After the numerous resolutions and
addresses which had proceeded from the colony,
against the appropriation of the revenues of the colony
under the sole authority of Parliament, against the
existing administration of waste lands, against the dis-
pensation of the colonial revenues by the
.Ministers
of the Crown, and against the veto reserved in mat-
ters of local legislation, the petitioners felt that they
had a right to expect that those undoubted grievances
would have been redressed by the Act referred to, but
their expectations had been entirely disappointed. Ex.
ploded theories of colonization were still in use, the
effect of which was to divert annually thousands of peti-
tioners' fellow-subjects from their shores, and force them
to seek a home for themselves in the backwoods of
America, while the persons sent to the colony from
home were wholly unsuited to its wants. The bestowal
of offices was still exercised at the nomination of
.the
Colonial Minister, without any reference to the just
claims of the colony; the salaries of the officers of Cus-
toms, and of other departments, were likewise placed
beyond the colonists' control; and the only result of this
new enactment, which had been introduced into Parlia-
ment by the Prime Minister himself with the avowed in-
tention of bestowing self-government upon the colony,
was still to withhold from it the material powers previously
exercised by the House of Commons. The colonists
were not permitted to vote their own civil list, lest it
might prove inadequate to the requirements of the pub-
lic service, nor to pass the simplest measures without the
consideration of the Colonial Minister. The petitioners
protested as well against the Act itself, as also
against the instructions given by the Minister, by which
the small powers conferred by the Act had been ren-
dered of no effect. They maintained that the Imperial
Parliament ought not to have any power to tax the
people of the colony, or to appropriate any of its
money, which functions could only be properly exer-
cised by the colony itself; that the revenue arising from
the public lands was as much the property of the
colony as the ordinary revenue, and ought therefore to
be subject only to like control; that the Customs and
other departments ought to be under the vigilant con-
trol of the Colonial Legislature; and that offices of trust
and emolument should be conferred only on settled in-
habitants of the colony, the office of Governor alone
excepted. The petitioners, in conclusion, stated that in
order to do away with any possible objection to the re-
moval of the grievances complained of, they were pre-
pared, on their demands being complied with, to assume
and provide for the whole cost of the internal govern-
ment of the colony, with the excepiion of the salary of
the Governor.

The petition was read amidst deep silence and atten-
tion on the part of the House.
Sir W. MOLESWORTH moved that the petition be
printed with the votes, and gave notice that he should
found a motion upon it.
The SPEAKER, said that a motion for the printing of
the petition could not be made until to-morrow.
Mr. TLIORNELY said it was customary to print all
petitions coming from the colonies along with the votes.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that he had not been favoured, as other Hon. Members
had been, with a printed copy of this very important pe-
tition, but as far as he could follow it while it was being
read, he thought it contained some expressions of a very
doubtful character. For instance, he believed that her
Majesty was described in it as being only the trustee of
her own possessions. He should wish to have an oppor-
tunity of reading this petition, and he would suggest
that its formal presentation should be postponed.—(No.)
Mr. HUME objected to the postponement of the re-
ception of the petition.
Sir J. GRAHAM had understood that this petition
was presented by one of her Majesty's servants, the
Noble Lord the Chief Secretary for Ireland, and he con-
ceived that, if there was anything wrong in it, the Noble
Lord ought. to have consulted his colleagues before pre-
senting it.—(Hear, hear.) He (Sir J. Graham) was not
aware of any expressions in the petition which were not
well worthy of the attention of the House. At all events
an expectation was held out that if the grievances com-
plained of were redressed, the colony would undertake
to bear all its expenses, and that was a subject well
worthy of consideration.—(Hear, hear.) He conceived
that the petition had been presented by the Noble Lord,
and the only remaining question was whether it should
be printed.

The SPEAKER said that the petition had not yet
been received. The Noble Lord might, if he thought
proper, withdraw it for the present, and present it to-
morrow.

Mr. HUME said that the petition hail been jointly
entrusted to him and the Noble Lord the Chief Secre-
tary for Ireland. He objected to any delay in the pre-
sentation of the petition, lest the petitioners might
thereby feel themselves affronted.
Mr. WALPOLE said that the petition had been pre-
sented by the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland, in
his capacity as a Member of that House, and not as a
member of her Majesty's Government. It was right
that the House should take notice of any expressions in
a petition whicla might seem to be of a doubtfal nature,
and it certainly had occurred to him, as well as to his
Right Hon. Friend, that in this petition the Queen was
described as only the trustee of her own dominions—a
phrase which he could not think would be adopted or re-
cognised by that Hause. He did not propose to reject
the petitioo, but only to take time to consider whether it
contained anything objectionable.
Mr. GLADSTONE said that he was properly respon-
sible for the prominence given to that petition, which he
had carefully read, and which certainly had not ap-
peared to him to contain anything to which objections
could be justly taken.—(Hear, hear.) He was not sur-
prised that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should have
been struck by the expression to which he had referred,
when simply hearing the petition read at the table; but
it was clear that it was only used in the sense of a poli-
tical argument, in which it was open to anyone, and
much more to the colonial legislature, to give that view
of the position of her Majesty in respect not of her do-
minions, but of the wild lands of the colony which are
merely subjects of sale.—(Hear, hear.) He should very
much regret any delay in the reception of the petition.
The Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland was clearly
the person who was primarily responsible for the petition,
and he (Mr. Gladstone) was persuaded that he would
never have presented to Parliament a document of so
much constitutianal importance without satisfying him-
self that its phraseology was free from all objection.
Mr. E. ELLICE said that the waste lands
l
Act for Aus-
tralia referred to in the petition had been suendrnoersedinbgy
her Majesty to the public under the
lends were
applicable for the civil list, and the proceeds of t
applicable to the uses of the colony. The petitioners,
Ma-
jesty was the trustee of those
therefore, in making use of the exprdesssi
entreatedlan the House not
Phee EXCHEQUER said he
wonerethwaitthhienr the
strict letter of propriety.
in the
of
t
to
Thedelay c theHA
N receptioncE r.
Looßf the He
t ition.
did not find that the context
softened the phrase
petition to which he had alluded, but a
he woulds not be a party to
come from a distant colony, Hear,
hear.)
the p etition had
opposing its presentation.—(
LICE,
hoped it would not be supposed
of explanation from Mr. E. EL-
After a few words
Lord NAAS said he
peHtietihonadinretande
r,-nv and not finding anything in it
this
of an objectionable nature,
tdoutby
thatieast hdesgwrosuelddibsleo_Z person t: presentl jestya.
to present it.—(Hear.)
he had thought r
as then ordered to lie on the table.
The petitior
COLONIALw CHURCH BILL.
that appeared to.thhimis
Mr. GLADSTONE gave notice of moving a Com-
mittee of the House on the subject of colonial ecclesias-
ties] law.
Sir J. PAKINGTON asked for what purpose ?
Mr. GLADSTONE replied that it was only in order
to move a resolution pro forma, to enable him to intro-
duce the Colonial Church Bill in an amended form.
TH
Sir DE LACY EVAENSArRoMseYito put a question to
the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs rela-
tive to the regulations of August, 1843, issued from the
F r e idg
an
n- at
of fir
ic
oe
r,
ilyastoairtheacttidng offiate foreign orders of distinc-
cep who may have re-
ceivetion for services in the field.
Lord STANLEY said there had been some hardship
on the sudden issuing of the regulation, but, at the dis-
tance of some years, that could scarcely be a reason for
recalling it.

OthileELL
toA Admiralty
lriertGat
ectryPiEni f thepublicatt Trtolli
seEn tooerf
sAtahfsVek
Boardth the Secretary
Admiral
eadcdair eibrtea:ri
been drawn
o f the
in her
Majesty's service respecpting therolomssaof the Birkenhead
steamer, complaining of the manner in which the duties
are performed at Greenhithe by that scientific officer
Captain Johnson, RN., for the adjustment of the com-
passes of her Majesty's ships before they proceed on sea
service; and whether any report from the late comman-
der of te Birkenhead on the compasses of that vessel
had been received by the Admiralty; and if so, whether
the same would be laid before Parliament?
Mr. STAFFORD said the attention of the Admiralty
had been drawn to the letter referred to, but that it did
not at all abate their confidence in the gallant gentleman
who was so justly described as that " scientific officer."
Moreover, the Board had received communications from
the late captain of the Birkenhead, stating his satisfac-
tion with the compasses of thatvessel; and they intended
to append to the papers upon her loss a copy of the cor-
respondence on this particular subject.—(Bear.)
ABATEMENT IN ASSESSMENTS ON TENANT-
FARMERS UNDER THE PROPERTY-TAX.
Mr. FREWEN begged to ask the Chancellor of the
Excct,hle4quaerndifllleveoientsi,dm 12, sec.
under the Property-tax
A
made lona
assessmentsateenac. 3u,
talartmeTsn,tsyymboi,gre shhtb:

profits fall short of such assessments, if the: farm is taken
from Michaelmas to Michaelmas (which is usually done
in the county of Sueeex and many other counties), in-
stead of from Lady-ciey to Lad.-day?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
this was a very important subjf et, interesting to a very
considerable portion of her Majesty's subjects—(Hear,
hear)—end in aesevcr to the Hon. Gentleman he did
not think he could do better than read a circular sent
out by the Board of Inland Revenue bearing upon the
question:—
" Inland Revenue, Somerset House, June 8.
" Sir,—Many inquiries have been made as to the
period to which the accounts of farmers should be
made up in order to show the amount of their profits
from the occupation of their farms, upon appeal under
the third section of the 14th of Victoria, chap. 12,
against the assessment of the income-tax under Schedule
B, on the grounds that the profits in the years of
assessment fell short of the sums assessed; and it is
understood that farmers do not make up their accounts
to the sth of April, but almost invariably to the 29th of
September in each year, or thereabouts. lam directed
by the board to state that, under the circumstances, no
objection is to be offered by the surveyors to accounts
being received on such appeals for the year from SO'
chaelmas, 1850, to Michaelmas, 1851, or to such other
day in the year on which the accounts of the appellants
shall have been usually made up, and to relief being
afforded by the district commissioners upon satisfactorY
proof that during such year the profits arising from the
occupation of their farms did not amount to the Burns
assessed under Schedule B. I take this opportunity t 0
observe, that the provision above referred to does not
authorise exemption, although the total income of ,the
party may have fallen short of 150/. in the year, but
only an abatement of the charge to the amount of the
profits actually acquired, in the same manner as relief is
granted by the 133 d section of the Income-tax Act in
respect of assessment under Schedule I) on profits 0
trades. I have further to state, that the relief is appli-
cable to persons occupying their own farms as WOO as
to tenant-farmers, provided they obtain their livelihood
principally from husbandry.
"I am, Sir, your obedient servant, ,
The Hon. Gentleman would see, therefore,
" THOMAS KEOGH.'
that the
point had engaged the attention of her Majesty's Go'
vernment, and that relief had already been secured.
THE WINE DUTIES.
Mr. MULLINGS begged to ask the Chancellor of the
Exchequerassurance
pt
rha
csjrwochucwegt tohfhuooerl
throughout
reducing
he edah
ulewl
caawiysn
gnt phe re
tet
hrap
aepadpr
eeir
,mde
hbptyeoonrtsgthi ioevnde
aaantts
youpoctr
to one
shilling a gailou—a rumour which was calculate' —0",
raise the price of wine abroad, and was already operating
to the injury of the revenue, by deterring parties from
taking wine out of bond for home consumption?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ender-
stood from the question of his Hon. Friend, that 9PPre"
hension had been occasioned by an announcement of st
project for reducing the import duty on wine to ens
shilling a gallon. There was no such project in contain;
plation on the part of the Government, and be trusted
_
that no Government would be found in this country
the
entertain such a project. There was no intention on Or_
part of the Government to recommend any reduction tt;
the duties on wine. Perhaps the House would permit
him to observe that questions of this kind ought to
expressly answered.—(Hear, hear.) Some years ego,
under Lord Ripon, a reduction had been effected in them
duties, but without realising the success anticipated.
ha
the case of the reduction to which the Hon. Member
referred, it was presumed that it would be necessary for
consumption to increase 500 per cent. He (the Chan'
werecellor of the Exchequer) was of opinion that there
many articles which presented superior claims to 0r242,
in any reduction of duty.—(Hear, hear.) The
the e
duties were upon a luxury of the rich; aed
were other articles, consumed by the poor of this CO'wL
try, which could put in a more favourable claim for rv-
duction.—(Hear.)

M. MA ZZINL 11°'
Mr. B. COCHRA.NE inquired of the Right
Gentleman the Home Secretary whether his attentioa
had been canal to an address, issued by M. Mazzipi:n
td
the workitz classes in this country her
? His olziec'h-
asking whether such was the case or not was to giveLif
Majesty's Government an opportunity of stating tu',",f
opinions upon an effusion which contained language "
a seditious character as far as the people of this 000:4
were coecrned, and objectionable to our allies. I,lla
address to which he referred began by stating that " „,
time was fast approaching in whico, according to 6.1;
probability, the oppressed would appeal in all tit
strength to the oppressor, and when more would be r!:
quired from the working classes in the way of resistang°
to a series of
Mr. HUME rose to order. He objected to a doe 11‘
rant being read when only a question was proposed to
be asked.—(Hear, hear.) Before the Hon. Membez,if
made any remarks on the document it ought to be P"
some way before the House.
Mr. WALPOLE said that the question addressed to
him was whether his attention had been called to sole
particular speech supposed to have been made by Dir 4.
Mazzini. His answer to that question was that big at'
tention had not been so called to such speech—(Hear.)
Mr. HUME requested the Hon. Member (Hr.
Cochrane) to confine himself to a particular passage la
the supposed speech.
The SPEAKER intimated that it was irregular for all
Hon. Member to comment upon a document before he
had read it.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. COCHRANE then signified his intention of call'
ing attention to the matter on the following day.
THE REV. MR. BENNETT.

Mr. HORSM AN intimated that to-morrow (this day),
on the motion for the adjournment of the House, he
would state what course he intended to pursue with re"
gard to the vicarage of From() inquiry.
WESTERN PACKET STATION, IRELAND.
Mr. H. HERBERT begged to ask his Hon. Friend
the Secretary to the Admiralty to what part of the coast
the proposed survey of harbours in Ireland would refer,
and how far southward it would extend?
Mr. STAFFORD replied that the two places to which
the survey of the Commission was strictly to be limited
were the Bay of Galway and the mouth of the Shannon.
He need not add, therefore, that it would embrace
portion of the seaboard of that locality so fortunately
represented by the Hon. Member who had asked the
question.—(Hear, and laughter.)
THE LAW OF PARTNERSHIP.
Mr. SLANEY asked whether the attention of the
Government had been directed to the resolution of e
th
Committee on this subject, with regard to issuing char-
ters of limited liability at a less expense than at present,
and whether it was intended to appoint a Commission to
inquire into the general subject of limited liability during
this or the following session of Parliament?
thatwhThewhich
h he
eCci
11E-
ae As
dtNi
himselfo Cn E L
wasL oOn 1
had
et
oo
off c greatctah s° occasion EXCHEQUERto
bring and
e dr
9°11!
notice of the House. The Hon. Gentleman had r 10;
given him notice of the present question, but, without 5C
all complaining of the omission, he would state, speak'
ing his general impressions on the question, that the
subject had been under the consideration of the Govern'
went, but that he thought there were at present walke
materials on which to form an opinion. He was 110
aware of any deficiency of information, but, if such wells
found to be the case. it would be open to the House to
consider whether a Commission should issue or not.
METROPOLIS WATER SUPPLY.
The House again went into Committee on this Bill.
On clause 2,
Mr. MO WATT proposed, as an amendment, that 511
tet
for domestic purposes, should be covered.
reservoirs within
thofifoEvlsedetixn.milesPaul's, ni
a:ostd;
tt
contained
eofiWsvveierAdvemr:dii,Prlesthat if reservoirs within such a distsov`
conversation, n v e rsati o
proposedn
at
nh
re thathSof.
should
dtBhubeerdomestics:lcovered;hausldeipnPug r°pbwvoui iscit
isnatMohttaiprnirrned water to be subjected to subsequent filtration,
agreed to.
drawn,
they
n needand
n notthe
b be
icaouvseer
wascovered.
Mr. MO
ao
vbvriAefT
aqueducts were to be covered by
e amendment was with
On clause 3,
• by which
thaleteyraeattronl,Bs3,
instead
of 1855.

After some conversation the amendment was nega-
tived, and tho clause was agreed to.
On clause 4 being proposed, 1853 f
Mr. MOWATT proposed to substitute the year
for 1855, as he wished the public to have the benefit 0
filtered water as early as possible.
The proposition was negatived without a division.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses 5,6, 7,8, 9,10, 11, 12, 13, and 14, Wee
agreed to.

Clause 15 having been put,
Mr. MO WATT proposed the omission of the words
" subject to the provisions of the special Act relating to
such company." lie believed that, under those words I
the special Acts would override the general Act.
Lord SEYMOUR, explained that that provision bad
been introduced for the purpose of
threlievwater above the
ing the compa-
nies from the necessity of forcing eir
level required by their special Acts.
Mowatt was withdrawn.
the amendment of Mr.
After a short conversation,
Mer
n
.la MO
use,tesdtatnot
supply
need not be
the provision in the
supplied to any district until four-fifths of the houses
samcWuAndTeTr
which
cheabjceoc
should have been provided with the necessary males,
pipes, and other apparatus. He feared that under that
arrangement many districts might remain for an indefi"
nice period without a constant supply.
Lord J. MANNERS said he proposed an addition 9
the clause, to the effect that the constant supply shell"
be given not only when four-fifths of the houses in a ails
trict should be supplied with the necessary apparatl
but also wherever four-fifths of the inhabitants shoe'
sign a requisition demanding such a suppy.
Mr. MO WATT thought that a requisition signed by
a majority of the inhabitants ought to be held sufel •
writ
in the case.
After some conversation the amendment proposed hi

Lord J. Manners was agreed to.
Th© clause, as amended, was then ordered to WO
part of the Bill.
The remaining clauses were, after some conversations
agreed to.
Several new clauses were brought up and added to the
Bill.
Lord R. GROSVENOR deprecated the constant re-
ference to the Board of Trade as a growing evil, which
LthleTnAN roseBURIALS.
to movethe second
Lord J. MANNERSswallowed up the time of the Government, without any
benefit to the constituencies.
The Bill was then ordered to be reported to the House,
and the report was brought up accordingly.
OPOreading of the Metropolitan Burials Bill. He was so
impresed with the importance of the question that be
felt bound to endeavour to pass a law on the subject this
session. The evils of the present system had been de-
tailed in Wee boas and iu speeches inyarlisreent. De