The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-13 00:00:00

NEWGATE AND LEADENHALL.
Generally speaking, the trade ruled steady, at very full
prices.

1 2i
, 1 i

s. d. s. d.
Mutton, Inferior 3 6 3 8
Do.,middling 310 4 2
Do., prime 4 4 4 6
Veal 3 6 4 10
Pork, small 4 0 4 0
is 10d to Os 2d.

461 7;

Per Sibs by the carcase.
s. d. s. d.
Beef, inferior 2 6 2 10
Do., middling 3 () 3 2
Do., prime largo 3 2 3 4
Do., do. small 3 6 3 S
Pork, large 3 4 310
Lambs

BOROUGH HOP.

-- -
We have only a limited inquiry for all kinds of hops, the
supply of which is small, yet prices are mostly supported.
Mid and East Kent pockets, 120 s. to 160 s. ; Weald of
Kent, 1102. to 1265. ; and Susses, 105 s to 120 s per cwt.

COLONIAL,.

SUGAR.—The demand for British Plantation has im
proved this week, and prices have become firmer. At
auction crystalised Domerara realised 35s to 38s 6d for low
to good greyish, and 34s to 34s 61 for mid to good brown.
REFINED has been in good request, at advanced rates.
Low to fine grocery lumps, 47s to 49s Gd.
EAST INDlA.—MmUritlne has been in active request, and
at very full rates. Publicly several thousand bags realised
378 to 38s 6d for fine yellow, 35s to 36s 6d for common to
good, 30s to 34s Gd for brown, 28s to 29s for very ord, 33s
to 38s for refining low to lino, and 408 to 41s for ord to mid
white ditto. Bengal has been been in moderate request ;
ord to fine white Benares at 36s to 395, fine and superior
grainy yellow at 39s to 40s, mid to good at 37s to 38s Gd.
Madras has been sold at 29s Gd to 30s Gd for low to good
soft yellow.
FOREIGN has been firmly supported, with a good inquiry
for exportation. Porto Rico, by auction, sold briskly at
higher prices, viz., 40s lid to 41s 6d for fine, and 38s to
39s 6(1 for mid and good low, and 36s 6d to 37s 6d per cwt.
COFFEE.—This article has been extremely dull, and
buyers still hold back. Native Ceylon of the new import
has been at 46s 6d. Platitation has been sold at 558 to 61s
for low mid and mid, at 52s for fine ord, and at 50s to 51s
for triage. Some peaberry went at 658 6d. Mocha has
greenish and yellowish having been
a large parcel (!f
sdoeledlinaedt 63585t0 2s—mid
6dto7Os, triage at 44s to 555, blacks at 30s,
Rio has hPeasabebrileenatso6l7dB, t°and67gbyfew b
auction aags of
Brazil6d.Privately
went at 43s to 45s 6d for good ord pale. Jamaica was
taken in at 56s for low mid. _ _ _

SPlCES.—Pimento has been rather dull ; coarse to mid
has been sold at sid to 6d. Ginger isiwanted ; Jamaica
went at 45s to 112 s for small and dark to good. White
pepper has been firm ; Singapore, mid has been sold at 9,1 d.
SALTPETRE.—BengaI has been taken in at 29s for 24 to
per cent. refraction.
COTTON.—There has been more business doing, and
holders ask higher rates.
RUM.—This article is steady.

TEA.—Owing to the advicOs from China, an advance of
id per lb. is quoted this week, but buyers have not come
forward freely as yet.
INDIGO.—Up to last evening 5,945 chests had passed, of
which 1,361 sold. Good Rd fine Bengal was rather firmer;
but Madras and Kurpah of-the same quality were cheaper,
as well as the lower kinds of Bengal.
TALLOW.—The market is quieter. P.Y.C. is 475. per
cwt. on the spot.
GREEN FRUlT.—Prices of all kinds are well supported,
the backward state of our own vegetation causing an addi-
tional demand for foreign fruit. Some parcels of oranges
from St. Michael and Lisbon having been sold by Keeling
and Hunt at public sale went at an advance of 2s. to 3s.
per box. Lemons are a shade lower, the cold weather
being against the use of the articles by the confectioners.
Nuts without alteration. Three cargoes of Barcelona have
arrived, and been housed in bond, to await the reduction
of duty. •

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.)

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the wool.
sack at five o'clock.

COASTING TRADE.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH presented petitions
from Hartlepool and Sunderland against the admission
of foreigners into the coasting service. The noble earl
called attention to certain returns, recently. laid before
the house, which showed that while there was a diminu-
tion of 2,412 seamen in the coasting trade, there had
been an increase of 17,817 in the foreign trade.
(Hear, hear.) This was a very remarkable state-
ment, but he apprehended that the returns with regard
to the foreign service were incorrect, and he supposed
they included emigrants and passengers who had worked
their passage out. He thought, under these circum-
stances, it was desirable that it should be ascertained
how many who went out in vessels in the foreign trade
returned again to this country. He trusted the Govern-
ment would make some inquiry into the subject.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY admitted there
was a discrepancy between the returns, and no doubt the
noble earl had given the correct interpretation of them.
He should make the inquiry which the noble earl had
suggested.
DOCKYARD INQUIRY COMMITTEE.
On the motion of Lord REDESDALE, the Earl of
Derby was permitted to attend as a witness before the
Dockyard Inquiry Committee before the House of Com-
mons.

COUNTY COURTS.
Lord ST. LEONARDS made some observations
which did not reach the gallery, as to the jurisdiction of
the county courts in bankruptcy, and in reference to the
commission which was to be appointed on the subject.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said his earnest atten-
tion should be given to the subject during the recess.
Lord CAMPBELL expressed his satisfaction at that
statement of the noble and learned lord.
Lord BROUGHAM was glad to hear that the Go-
vernment intended to issue a commission, and he hoped
the subject would be fully and satisfactorily considered.
EXCHEQUER BILLS BILL.
The Exchequer Bills Bill, after a few observations
from Lerd ST. LEONARDS, was read a second time, and
the standing orders having been suspended, it was read
a third time and passed.
COUNTY ELECTIONS POLLS (SCOTLAND)
BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
CHIMNEY SWEEPERS' REGULATION BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
The Earl of CLANCARTY -':•asted the house would
not be precipitate in passing the bill. He thought that
some inquiry should be instituted to ascertain, before
the bill became law, whether it would not give rise to
some inconvenience and hardship.
The Earl of WICKLOW also opposed the bill, which
he thought, if passed, would only encumber the statute
book. He moved that the bill be read a second time
that day six months.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said he had brought
in the bill for the purpose of extending the pro-
visions of the act, which now only applied
to the metropolis, to the country generally. He
also proposed, in order to prevent the evasions to
which that act now gave rise, to include under its pro-
visions young persons under 16 years of age, who assisted
chimney sweepers, as well as apprentices. The present
bill was so simple that he did not art'cipate any opposi-
tion would be offered to it, and he Fad not come forti-
fied with papers to show its absolute necessity, but he as-
sured their lordships that they could form no notion of the
physical and moral evils which were now inflicted on a
numerous and helpless class of the community in conse-
quence of the existing state of the law.
Lord ST. LEONARDS supported the bill.
The amendment was then withdrawn, and the bill was
read a second time.
BURDENS ON REAL PROPERTY.
The Earl of MALMESBURY presented a petition
from Christchurch, for the revision of the poor laws,
complaining of undue burdens on real property, and
praying for an alteration in the law of settlement. He
did not think that any subject discussed of late years
surpassed this in importance, especially at a period when
all statesmen seemed occupied with the laudable endea-
vour to adjust our taxation, and make the pressure as
equable as possible on all classes. The parish from
which this petition proceeded was a large one, and the
petitioners had in reality to pay another income tax on
their real property, because they bad to pay a poundage
on the rental they derived from their property. That
income tax varied from 10 to 15 per cent. on the annual
value of the property ; in some parishes it had been as
much as 80 per cent. It should be remembered that real
property paid five millions a year for the maintenance of
the poor, and paid it in a most anomalous manner, some
parishes being taxed 80 per cent., and others only one
per cent. While a millionaire paid nothing on his
funded property, a man with a small cabbage garden
was compelled to pay from 10 to 80 per cent, on his
patch of land. The subject had been discussed in both
houses with great ability, and in 1850 a committee of
their lordships' house had been appointed. He took an
active part in that committee on behalf of real property ;
another noble lord had defended as ably what he con-
sidered the rights of personal property; the noble baron
opposite (Lord Overstone) might be considered to have
been the representative of the auriferous interest. (A
laugh.) He wished to ask the noble lord at the head of
the Government whether it was his intention to bring
forward any measure this sesion to reform the present
poor-law, or the law affecting the removal of pauper:3f;
and further, if the proposed succession duties on real
property should become the law of the land, he intended
to relieve real property from any portion of the burden
of about five millions, which it now exclusively paid for
the support of the poor ?
The Earl of ABERDEEN was understood to say that
it was not intended to transfer any burdens from per-
sonal to real property. In answer to the question of
the noble lord, he had to state that the business before
the other House of Parliament was such that it would
not be possible to bring forward a measure of this exten-
sive and important description with any reasonable hope
of carrying it this session. And if such a measure were
introduced and laid on the table, without a reasonable
hope of its being carried, it would be attended with very
mischievous effects on the country, with respect to the
duties to be imposed on successions, he would recom-
mend the noble earl first to understand the subject a
little better, and in order to do so, to wait till he saw
the resolutions. To say that poor-rate to the amount of
five millions was paid by real property was a mere fiction
of the noble lord's imagination ; perhaps one-fourth of
that would be nearer the truth. (Hear, hear.) It was
impossible for him to give any further answer to the
noble earl's question.

Lord OV.gRSTONE said that no subject could exceed
this, either in importance or in delicacy. He could wish
that the noble lord who presided over the committee of
1850 bad been present to defend its proceedings and to
justify its report. He had taken some part in that corn.
mittee, and had opposed some of the views of the noble
earl. But the question was one of great delicacy, be-
cause it involved the most difficult of all questions—the
adjustment and equilibrium of taxation. A desire had
been expressed in some quarters to assess moveable pro-
perty, and to render it contributory to the poor rates ;
but the evidence taken before that committee showed
the great necessity of moving with circumspection, ,
for it was pre-eminently a question in which it might be
said—

Fools rush in Where angels fear to tread.
(Hear, hear.) The more the ultimate consequences of
such theories were traced out, the more mischievous
would they be found to be.
The Earl of DERBY said he could not help thinking
that there was some confusion in the mind of the noble
lord between real and landed property. If the noble
lord meant to refer to the rates levied only upon land,
he quite concurred in his statement ; but he was quite
in error in saying that a very large portion of the rates
did not fall upon real but upon personal property.
Lord OVERSTONE did not say personal property.
The Earl of DERBY—But the noble lord said that a
large portion did not fall upon real property, and he
(Lord Derby) did not know any distinction except be-
tween real and personal property ; so that if a large
portion did not fall upon real property it must fall upon
personal property.
Lord OVERSTONE explained that what he had said
was that a large portion of the poor rate fell upon what
could hardly be called real property, by which he meant
landed property, but upon houses and places of business.
The Earl of DERBY said that the discussion had not
arisen at all upon the distinction between landed and
other property, but upon real and personal property. It
arose out of the proposition which they understood had
been submitted to Parliament, by which a new and a
very heavy tax would be imposed upon successions to
real property—property which was now exempt from
the legacy duty, but upon which burdens of a dispro-
portionate amount had been laid for other purposes.
After a few remarks from several noble lords, the
subject then dropped.

THE CLITHEROE ELECTION CASE.
Lord BEAUMONT drew the attention of the house to
die fact that the house had sent no answer to the appli-
cation of the other house to concur in a joint address
herthe state Majesty
of tthoi s a pb po
rooi nu tg
ha. c oAms-
ra to sts
oeu Ctroo wi
unq,
iui
rreayi
ni ntgo
the case might arise over and over again, it was
highly desirable that the house should adopt some
definite course which might serve as a precedent.
If no one else made the motion it was the business of
the Government to see that some answer should be re-
turned to the House of Commons.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said he was very glad the
noble lord had brought this subject before the house, as
he thought it was proper the house should come to a
decision upon it. Some time ago a noble and learned
lord asked him what was his intention with regard to
this address, and he told him in answer that although he
motion
ifmoctiilooamnr addresseswtuhrietgwa vradlsi
had moved that their lordships should agree with other
cloho t hadthishis
iadu beented
r intention
ut; ut
obpu ftmr
thatoamk e theao
any
yHe
suchouurss
ee
it was competent for any other noble lord who thought
proper to make such a motion. If he recollected aright
his noble and learned friend gave some sort of intima-
tion of such an intention, but he supposed he must have
been mistaken. At all events it was competent for him
or any other noble lord to make the motion, and that
not having been done, he concluded that it was not the
wish or intention of any noble lord to take such and he, therefore, felt it incumbent on him a ste,p to pro pose a
course for their lordships to adopt with reference to this
matter. Assuming, as he did, that their lordships were
disposed to agree in not adopting the address of the
House of Commons, it was necessary to consider what
was the proper and suitable course to take. The best
course to take, he thought, would be to move that the
address be taken into consideration that day six months.

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MAY 13, isst

fore the division on the Derby Budget, he met the hon.
member for Wells on the steps of the Reform Club, and
that hon. gentleman asked him how he was going
to vote. (A laugh.) His reply was that he had
never given a Tory vote since he had been in Parlia-
ment, and he was not going to begin now—(a laugh)--
but, at the same time, he added that the Irish party
would be very much influenced in the course they would
take by the intentions of the new Government with re-
gard to the income tax, and the hon. gentleman
referred him to the speech of the right honourable
gentleman the member for Halifax, in which the right
hon. gentleman stated that Ireland was in by far too
exhausted a state to bear an income tax, and the im-
pression which this reference produced was that the
Whig party were not favourable to the extension of the
income tax to Ireland. Accordingly, when he went to the
meeting of Irish members he stated as much, and also
that he had it upon the authority of the right hon. gen-
tleman the member for Wells, that the right hon.
gentleman the member for Halifax was of the same
opinion still. (Hear.)
Mr. HAYTER could not charge his memory with
what had passed, but no doubt what was now stated
was perfectly correct in the main. It was hardly likely,
however, that he could disclose what were the then
opinions of the right hon. gentleman the member for
Halifax, and in so far as that part of the statement was
concerned he could not assent to it. (Hear.)
Sir C. WOOD had made no statement to his hon.
friend that he was aware of, but still he had no hesita-
tion in declaring that he had made the speech which had
been referred to. (Hear.)
Mr. MALINS was glad this explanation had been
made, and he hoped it would be a warning to hon. mem-
bers in future not to make statements of alleged
fasts affecting personal character unless they were
thoroughly convinced of their accuracy. (Hear.) Now,
he remembered distinctly that the hon. and gallant
member for Westmeath stated, on Friday night, that
before the division in December last, an accredited agent
from the Whig and Peel parties waited upon the Irish
members, and stated that it the Irish members would
assist in turning out the Derby Government there would
he no income tax imposed upon Ireland. It now turned
out that this was not so, and the only authority upon
which the agency was supposed to arise was a loose con-
versation in the lobby of the House of Commons or
upon the steps of the Reform Club. (Hear, hear.) The
hon. member for Westmeath should have been more
cautious in the statement he had made. (Hear.)
Mr. MAGAN supposed the hon. and learned gentle-
' man meant to convey that he (Mr. Megan) had stated
that which was not true. Now he did not say the party
who made the statement to the Irish members was
"the accredited agent," but was considered as an accre-
dited agent of the Whig and Peel party. He had a
right to consider amember in any light he pleased---(a
laugh)—and he certainly did look upon the gentleman
who conveyed the statement to the Irish members as an
accredited agent, as he now looked upon the honour-
able and learned member as an accredited agent of
Lord Derby. (A laugh.) The whole speech of the hon.
and learned gentleman was both malicious and untrue.
(Order, order.)
The SPEAKER said the hon. member must be aware
that such language was out of order. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. MAGAN had no objection to withdraw the
words if they were unparliamentary. (Cheers.)
Mr. BOWER was present at the Irish meeting, and
he had certainly no recollection of the statement hav-
ing been made upon authority.
Mr. LUCAS, on the other hand, who was, also pre-
sent at the meeting, declared that the gentleman who
made the statement professed to make it upon
the authority of a leading member of the Whig
party. The gentleman who made the statement
was the hon. member for Tralee, and what tended
to confirm it was the speech of the right hon. gentleman
the member for Halifax delivered a few days afterwards,
in which the right honourable gentleman warned
the Irish party to be on their guard, and not allow the
thin end of the income tax wedge to be got into Ireland.
(Hear, bear.)
Mr. M. O'CONNELL denied that he had professed
to make the statement on authority. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. SCULLY was also under the impression that the
statement was not made on authority, and to prove this
he need only state that the meeting came to a resolution
to support the Tories in office. (Hear, and a laugh.)
Sir R. INGLIS hoped that the good sense and feel-
ing of the house, considering the mass of public business
' before it, would agree that sufficient space had been
allowed to hon. gentlemen to set themselves right in the
judgment of each other and of the house, and that they
might at last be permitted to resume the business for
which they were sent there. (Hear.) He would cau-
tiously abstain from any one word that could give of-
fence to either side, but respectfully submitted to them
all that there had been enough--perhaps more than
enough—(hear)—of these discussions. He had thought,
when the Speaker called upon the Sergeant-at Arms to
introduce the messenger from the other house, that it
would have put an end to all unnecessary discussion.
(Hear.)
The subject then dropped.
THE BUDGET—RESUMED DEBATE.
The house then went into Committee of Ways and
Means.
The CHAIRMAN read the resolutions.
On the second resolution, " And for and in respect of
the occupation of such lands, tenements, or hereditaments
(other than a dwelling-house occupied by a tenant distinct
from a farm of lands), for every 20s. of the annual value
thereof, one moiety of each of the said sums of 7d., 6d., and
5(1., for the above-named times respectively,"
Mr. VANSITTART moved, as an amendment, the omis-
sion of the word " moiety" and the insertion of the words
"third part ;" and urged in support of it, that the late Sir
Robert Peel had thought it necessary, when he introduced
the income tax in 1841, to reduce the assessment of the
farmers from three-quaff :,ers to one-half tho rental, and that
the causes which induced him to do so existed to a greater
degree now than ever before. No person could question
the fact, that the profits upon land were much smaller than
they formerly wore, and that they were certainly not
greater in England than in Scotland and Ireland. To
place the farmers of the United Kingdom on a footing of
equality was a measure of justice which ought to be con-
ceded. In conclusion, the hon. gentleman stated, that in
proposing this amendment he had no u:sh whatever to in-
terfere with the conducting of the public business by the
Government. This was no party question, nor had he
treated it as such, although it was his misfortune to sit on
the Opposition side of the house. He hoped the grounds
he had assigned would induce the house to consider the
proposition he had now made to be
.just and fair. He
thought it would be far better for the right hon. gentleman
to allow his scheme of finance to have such qualifications
applied to it as justice and equity demanded, than to resist
all appeals and to determine on carrying it through as a
stereotyped plan. (Cheers.)
Tho CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had listened
with great satisfacti m, so far as the hon. gentleman was
personally concerned, to the very intelligent statement he
had made. (Hear, hear.) He did not like the whole of
the honorrable gentleman's case, but he did not think
any gentleman could have stated that case with more
ability. (Hear, hear.) He assured the hon. gentleman he
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had not the slightest in-
tention of making any charge against him for not going on
with b's amendment on a former night. But it was the
duty of the Government to press forward measures affect-
ing the public interest, as it was the duty of hon. members
to see what it was they had in justice to propose. He (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) was very glad to hear the
hon. gentleman refer to the succession or legacy duty, be-
cause he hoped the committee would soon arrive at the dis-
cussion of that question. He world not expend the time
of the committee by noticing the remarks which the hon.
gentleman had made upon his (the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer's) conduct in imposing various taxes upon the
farmers, notwithstanding the comments he (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) had made upon the taxes intended to be
put upon them by the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr.
Disraeli) in December last. But the taxes which fell upon
yeomen—men who cultivated their own land—were not
peculiar to that class of persons ; they applied to all other
owners of land. It should be borne in mind, however,
that there was no house tax upon them (as was the case
with the budget of December last), and that there was
no income tax put upon them where their income was
under 1001. a-year. It was true the yeoman world be
subject to the succession tax, but in that case he would
pay it in common with the entire community. However,
let that pass. The subject would come for discussion in
its turn. He entirely agreed with the hon. gentleman
that this was no party question. There was no class
whose claims he would more regret to disappoint than
the farmers'. But, in the first place, the committee
must recollect that, since the repeal of the corn
laws, the income tax had been several times renewed.
In 1848 it was renewed, prices having already become low,
and with every prospect of their becoming lower. In 1851
the income tax was again renewed, with prices exceedingly
low. But, notwithstanding the low state of prices at that
period, the farmers not only accepted. but accepted with
out inconvenience, the proposition of the right hon. gentle-
man tho member for Halifax (Sir C. Wood), who, by a
clause to which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would
presently refer, put the far mere on a more favourable foot-
ing than any other class. Indeed, no class stood upon so
favourable a footing as the fanner. That, he thought, was
a very strong reason against renewing such a proceeding of
exceptional legislation in favour of tie farmer. As to the
proposition that the English farmers should be placed on
the same footing, for this purpose, with the Scotch and
Irish farmers, the only restilt of this would be, that the
Scotch and Irish farmers would immediately, and reasonably
enough, demand that further concessions should be made
in their favour, so as still to place them in the same relative
position, with respect to the English farmers, that their
comparative disadvantages required. The hon. gentleman
wished to make it an argument against the Government
: 'neasure, that the reduction of rents in England had not
been adequate to the diminution of the farners' profits
)ccasioued by recent legislation. Assuming this to be the
rase, it was no argument against the Governs
liesnelotas to lettnbut
:imply a lively and usefrl suggestion to, th
I ..heir rents fall a little more quickly and effectually than
I .hey had fallen—(a laugh)—at all events, however small the
r 'eduction of rents might have been in England, he begged
t o remind the hon. gentleman that the reduction had been
s till less in Scotland. But legislation upon the income tax,
o r upon any other subject, ought not to be based upon any
si rich grounds. The business of legislation herein was to
p roceed upon the principle that farming was an occupation,
a s other occupations, which must be left to find its level
u nder the influence of competition between man and man.
'hey had no right to assume that the profits of the farmer
vy ere diffcdifferentt now from what, they used to be. They must,
it i considering these points, investigate, not the prices of
„mmodl les merely, but the quantities produced, the
q uality, the cheapness of production, the application of
tacbinery, the greater economy of the various processes
of farming, the extension of drainage, and so on'. (Hear,
h( ler.) But the main thing to be kept in mind was, that
th ey had already made provision for the case of the farmer.
TI iey had not, indeed, said to him, " Go into schedule D,
if you please," for they had considered that the inquisition

I That was the course they pursued with regard to all bills
' sent up from the other house, and which they were not
disposed to pass, and the House of Commons had disco-
vered what their lordships had done by searching the
records of their proceedings. That was considered the
most corteous mode of proceeding towards the other
house, because he believed in former times they did not
move the postponement of the reading of a bill for six
months, but they rejected it absolutely; and it was in
consequence of its being considered a more courteous
proceeding towards the other house that they had
adopted the mode now usually followed. He moved
that a message be sent to the House of Commons, ac-
quainting them that this house, having considered the
report of the select committee of the House of Commons
appointed to consider a petition complaining of an undue
election for the borough of Clitheroe, and the minutes of
evidence taken before it, do not think it expedient to
concur in an address to her Majesty praying for an
inquiry.
The motion was agreed to.
BOROUGH OF MALDON.
Lord ST. LEONARD'S asked the Earl of Aberdeen
what was the intention of Government with regard to
the address for an inquiry respecting the borough of
Malden.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said he had read the evi-
dence in regard to all the other cases in which he had
moved for address, but he had not read the evidence in
this case yet, and he could not therefore at present an-
swer the question.
Their lordships then adjourned at half-past seven
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
The Lords' amendments to the Wakefield Stoke Mills
Bill were considered and agreed to.
The following bills were read a third time andpassed :
—The Australian Agricultural Company, Dundee Water-
works, Great Northern Railway (No. 1), Londonderry,
Enniskillen, and Sligo Railway, Lough Foyle and Lough
Swilly Drainage and Reclamation, and the Lough Foyle
and Lough Swilly Railway.
The High Ham and Ashcott Roads, Midland Rail-
way (Leicester and Hitchin). and York Drainage and
Sanitary Improvement and Foss Navigation Bills were
read a third time.
Mr. FREWEN presented a petition praying for the
inspection of nunneries.
Mr. 0. LANGTON presented a similar petition.
Mr. T. D UNCOMBE presented a petition from Great
Yarmouth, complaining of the French occupation of
Rome.

Mr. A. HASTIE presented a petition from Glasgow,
in favour of Mr. Craufurd's Sheriffs' Court Bill.
Sir R. INGLIS presented a number of petitions
against the opening of the Crystal Palace on Sundays.
Sir J. TROLLOPE presented a petition from Spald-
ing, in favour of the total repeal of the advertisement
duty.

Mr. O'CONNOR HENCHY presented petitions from
Kildare and other places in favour of the ballot and
tenant right.
Sir G. GREY presented a petition from Neville Hall
Medical College, Newcastle, praying for the enfran-
chisement of the London University; and a petition from
the working men of Morpeth against the opening of the
Crystal Palace on Sundays.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from the Winchester
Farmers' Club, in favour of the ballot ; also from the
county of Norfolk, in favour of the County Rates Ex-
penditure Bill.
Mr. M. GIBSON presented a petition from Essex to
the same effect.
Mr. MASTERMAN presented petitions from Ches-
ter and other places, in favour of the inspection of nun-
neries.

Mr. STRUTT presented a petition from the Univer-
sity College, London, in favour of the enfranchisement
of the London University.
Several other petitions were presented by Hon. Mem-
bers to a similar effect.
Mr. M. GIBSON presented a petition from the
Literary Societies' Union of Lancashire and Cheshire,
in favour of the total abolition of the advertisement duty
and penny stamp.

On the motion of Mr. WALPOLE, Lord SI

Leonards' Lunacy Bills were read a first time, and the
second reading fixed for the 19th of May.
Mr. MILLIGAN presented a petition praying for the
total repeal of the advertisement duty.
Lord CHELSEA presented a petition from Dover in
favour of national arbitration.
Lord GODERICH presented a similar petition.
Mr. C. BERKELEY presented a petition from the
solicitors of Cheltenham against the reduction of the
stamp duty on attorney's certificates.
Mr. COBDEN presented petitions from places in
Yorkshire, against the Government scheme of educa-
tion.

Sir F. KELLY presented a petition from farmers and
others in Suffolk, against the proposed licence duty on
maltsters.
Sir C. WOOD presented petitions from Paisley, Barns-
ley, and Moxenden, in favour of the legalising of mar-
riages with a deceased wife's sister.
Sir J. GRAHAM presented a petition from 2,000
inhabitants of Carlisle, in favour of the opening of the
Crystal Palace on Sundays.
Lord D. STUART gave notice that he should, to-mor-
row, move for a return of the number of warrants signed
by different Secretaries of State for the opening of letters
at the Post-office from the year 1845 to this time.
Lord H. VANE presented petitions from Durham
and Barnard Castle praying for the legalising of mar-
riages with a deceased wife's sister.
Mr. H. BERKELEY presented a petition from the
letterpress printers of Bristol praying for the total abo-
lition of the advertisement duty.
Mr. C. BERKELEY asked whether there is to be
any inquiry in this session of Parliament into the work-
ing of the Public Health Act, with a view to the amend-
ment of that act, or of the construction of the Board of
Health ?

Sir W. MOLESWORTH said, that at the termina-
tion of the existence of the present Board of Health the
Government would be prepared to bring in a bill to
renew the board, making such improvements as would
be deemed necessary. It was not intended to institute
any extraordinary inquiry.
Mr. HUME said that unless there Were an inquiry
great dissatisfaction would bo excited.

LEGACY DUTY.
In answer to Sir F. KELLY,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that when the succession tax shall be imposed, the regis-
tration of all deeds of settlement will not be compulsory
by law.

HACKNEY CARRIAGE BILL.
In reply to a question,
Mr. FITZROY said he was now engaged in framing
a clause to be introduced into the Hackney Carriage
Bill, for the purpose of preventing the nuisance occa-
sioned by advertising vans, but there was a difficulty in
determining what was an aivertising van.
Sir D. L. EVANS hoped the bill would contain a
power of appeal against the decisions of police magis-
trates.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said there were so many objec-
tions to this measure, that he trusted the Government
would now see the necessity•of referring it to a select
committee.
Mr. FITZROY could see no such necessity. The
bill was one of great public interest, and he hoped the
house would not consent to any proposal which woulkl
have the effect of delaying it.
EXCISE DUTIES ON SPIRITS BILL.
In reply to a question,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
was proposed to take the final sense of the house upon
this part of the budget in the committee on the bill. In
that case he should propose to read the bill a second
time to-night ; but if the principle of the bill was to b 4
contested on the second reading, he should, of course,.
not take the second reading at a time when there could.
be no discussion.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
ASSESSED TAXES.
evhea
to take the opportunity of suggesting that the resolutions
on assessed taxes should be taken and
reported,, pro
forma, at once, so that a bill might be brought in as
speedily as possible, and the exemptions
agreed to.
Mr. DISRAELI made no objection to this proposal,
isl

definingPov
eAN Pr
no Ewm what
ethatßlLL.camewawisheds
in
sseEee
bill.
if :G.
bsabhinillToldl
uwhfvfloeda
srhtetahnnketehpueupixtrNhoe
Mr. RICARDO said the late Government introduced a
to
they
n newspaper,esawi dw theyh en
the Government measure was like to be brought in.
CHANCELLOR
state
efg
great
not f theforwardness,EXCHEQUEßandrready
saiddy
te
b thebe
laid upon the table, but it had been thought expedient
to delay bringing in the bill until the decision of the
house had been taken on the subject of the advertise.
ment duty.
Mr. RICARDO begged to remind the right hon.
gentleman that a prosecution was now, pending against
parties in the Court of Exchequer upon the question
arising out of the present unsettled state of the law.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it was quite true
the prosecution was pending against a person named
Collet, but the prosecution was taken at the defendant's
own request, for the purpose of having the law defined
by one of the superior courts.
THE IRISH DISPUTE.
On the question of going into committee of ways and
means,
Mr. MAGAN entered into an explanation of what
he said on Friday night, relative to the intentions of the
present Government as to extending the income tax
to Ireland. He stated then that three honourable
members represented to a meeting of Irish members
that in the event of the Derby Government being turned
out, and a Whig Administration succeeding them, there
would be ne disposition on the part of the new Govern-
ment to extend the income tax to Ireland. He was
mistaken in the members who made that statement. WI
was only two, namely, the member for Tralee, and the
member for Roscommon. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. F. FRENCH wished to say a few words upon
this subject. The house must not suppose that this
meeting of Irish members was a secret affair—it was
held open and above board—and at that meeting the ques-
tion of extending the income tax to Ireland was warmly
discussed, and the discussion was ultimately adjourned. In
meeting,
eetminega,nwhehilme, bighettweeaeyn
ttihiee ardigjhoutrnhmenen. tgeannd the
tlenmnntehxet
member for Wells had represented to him what had
occurred. The right hon. gentleman then led him to
understand that there would be no disposition to extend
the income tax to Ireland, and upon the strength of that
information he made the statement to the meeting of
Irish members which was now imputed to him. (Hear.)

Mr. M. O'CONNELL said he was bound to confirm
the statement which bad just been made. Shortly be-

;`z

;*_,\

'
• f.

Y

~,~.~:
~-r~l

I into his affairs, in that case necessitated, would not. be make any general statement on the subject , because, if so,
re
I agreeable to him, but they had given him the means of it might the committee should hear him
averting an unfair assessment. He might he remark that be advisable that
the hon. gentleman had made a serious error in his calcu-
Wiens of the profits of the farmer. The hon. member
did ,' before they proceeded to consider that amendment.
The CHANCELLOR he EXCHEQUER said—l
not regard the maintenance of the farmer's family, the lex- entirely concur n use suggests._ -f the right hon. gentle.
lenses of his living, as any element in his calculationis— man. I also feel the great importance of the question,
thear)—and, for that matter, the farmers seem much ills-
posed to take the same view,, and to regard the expense' of and, considering that I have only had an opportunity of
d • rt. g to it on one single occasion, and that necessarily
their maintenance as part of the expense of their fa • g, ale
ul-
and as not entering into the question of profits, which as in conjunction with a great many other highly important
a fallacy not to be admitted. Where, however, the as-- subjects, it is probable that I have not been able so success-
profits es sped° fiartabiT;
earriellyestsotehnafnorcaemasosiesstysmoefuhtisasruepont,niat
moiety;wasot fully as might have been desired to place the propositions
for it world be competent in a farmer, who at the of
the year found himself so situated, to, o before coaran *s- of the Government clearly and fairly before the commit-
tee. lam therefore obliged to the right hon. gentleman
sioners—not Government commissioners but local corn •s- for. his suggestion—and, I may say, that I had proposed
excess of assessment allowed him in his payment of he
sioners—and, if he could make out his case, to have y rising when you sir,. had. read the resolution, to state the
did not keep accounts. There might, no dOubt be farm
tax. Tho hon. gentleman objected to this that f views othe
f Government with respect to it. (Hear.) In
• the cone-
small farmers who did not keep accounts ; but, he icon a. mittee to the limitation of the proposition as it stands
the first place, I wish to call the attention of dently believed that the great bulk of those who would before us. There is an immense number—at least
come within the operation of the measure did keep ic- there is a. considerable number of points of great ins.
counts. Most assuredly this was the case he might olm4st
say universally, with the farmers in the Leith a E el e 1 ' 11
portance anti veiy serious difficulty, which we shall
and in Scotland. There was, however, one face ale% age hues to examine when we come to the details of the
monstrative that the profits of the farmer were not so smell question. (Hear, hear.) But most of these points lam
as was stated, and this was that in the past year the whale anxious atpresent, in some degree, to keep out of view;
amount of relief from assessment claimed by the tenant because, in the first place, it is hardly possible to consider
farmers of England and Scotland, upon a total assessment
of 330,0001., was 'between 5,000/. and 6,000/. only; the them until the committee shall have had under their eyes
(Hearwhole amount of relief actually granted being 3,419/. the precise form in which the proposition of the Govern-
, hear.) This fact, he would repeat, demonstratively ment will be ultimately clothed ; and because, in tlie second
proved that the farmers, as a body, had no case to shoe. lace, the general principles which are • volved in that pro-
that their profits, including, of course, the cost of the main- Position are of themselves so exceedMlngly importent that
tenance of their fami, did 'not represent fully one-half they deserve the undivided and exclusive- attention of the
of their rent. (Hear, hear.)
• committee. (Hear, hear.) It is most desirable, then, that
Sir F. KELLY maintained that by the admission of the We should, in the first instance, fix our undivided and closest
Chancellor of the Exchequer, land was taxed more heavily attention on the principles which are involved in this 'ilea-
than other property, and he complained that, in addition, sure, and that our vote upon the measure in the first we
pressure upon the farmers was uncertain and unjust. stance should be strictly a vote on its principle, before we
He ridiculed the arguments of the Government, who, he come to consider the multitude of serious but still minor
and des
p_oesea of in going through the details of the proposi-
said, admitted every separate portion of their measure to anel eubordinate questions which we shall have to examine
•be unjust, but maintained that it was quite equitable as a
whole. He described the peculiar burdens which he con- t
then.colitaehe'ar.
" That, towards raising the
) The proposition, as it stands before
supply granted to "herfollMoawjessV, the stamp duties payable
calved to press with undue severity upon the farmers, and
law upon or for, or in respect of legacies, shall be granted
sought for them, at any rate, some relief from the peculiar
by injustice of the tax in question.
Mr. BRIGHT described Sir Fitzroy as having beep and made payable upon and for every succession to the
beneficial enjoyment of any real or personal estate, or to
speaking on a "Suffolk brief," and told him that he was the receipt of any portion or additional portion of the
badly advised as to his fact. With regard to the amend- income or profits thereof that may take place upon, or in
meat, he urged the gross injustice of proposing to tax the consequence of, the death of any person, under whatever
opulent farmer, who very often kept a carriage (with more title, whether existing or future, such sucession may be
than one horse) and followed the hounds, only upon the derived." Now, the vote of the committee is asked upon
same amount as the poor clerk or mechanic who earned two the present occasion for the affirmation of a general prince.
pounds a-week,fend this at a time when agricultural produce pie that some tax or other—l don't propose to pledge you
was selling at so high and remunerative a rate. The time to say whether an equal or an unequal. tax—shall be laid
, for the cry of agricultural distress was gone by, and was no upon all successions to property that take place in cense-
longer available as political capital. The motion was that
nee of death. That condition—the accruing death tax
of a " very young member," and a more impudent one had i'n come
never been brought into the house. quence of a succession that ensues upon is
the pivot of the whole measure. The importance of the
Sir F. KELLY observed, that if the hon. member would bearing of this proposal is to be considered with refer-
introduce a motion to exempt artisans and small trades- ence to two great classes of property which have hitherto
men, to whom he alluded, to the extent of one-sixth, he been either exclusively or in the main exempt from all
wotild most cordially support him.
Mr. BANKES thought the hon. memberrg upon death or upon succession ; firstly, real pro-
could not have perty, whether settled or unsettled ; and, secondly, settled
attended to the speech of the hon. and learned member, or property, whether personal or real. The first question we
to that of the hon. member who introduced the motion, for have to consider is, what are the reasons that have deter.
his arguments had had nothing to say to the fact they'had mined the Government, and that I hope will determine
adduced. The hon. member for Berkshire mainly rested his the committee, to resort to this source for the replenish.
demand for the English farmer on the point of justice, and meat of the revenues of the country ? The right hon. gen-
on the comparison of his case with that of the Scotch and tleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli) said a few nights ag.o, if I
the Irish farmer, He knew many parts of his own county understood him correctly, that I had founded the eustifi-
in a state far below that which he believed to be the case in cation of this measure upon its character and effect,
Scotland or Ireland. The hon. member said that farming which I described in addressing the house on a former
was the best trade going. He (Mr. Banker) was not there occasion namely, that the laying of this tax upon
at that moment to deny it—(hear, from the Government successions to property would countervail the operation of
benches)—but they were putting a tax on the farmer for the income tax in so far as that operation is too severe in
seven years to come. Who could say the present state of respect of intelligence and skill, and too lenient in respect
prosperity would continue so long ? He fared the excep- of property as compared with Intelligence and skill. The
tions from prosperity to which he alluded, would increase, right hon. gentleman observed that that being the pur-
and he felt it his duty, as representing a large agricultural pose of the tax, it was obvious that the tax so considered
constituency, to support the proposition of the hon. mem- ought to terminate- or at least, in the view and mind of
her for Berkshire.
the Government, ought to be intended to terminate, in the
Mr. WHALLEY• took that opportunity of entering iess year 1860. Now, I certainly could not with any great
most solemn protest against the reimposition of the income
tax. Though ho approved generally of the budget. The confidence submit this proposition to the committee, if the
tax was intended to terminate in 1860, inasmuch as we
income tax was not on the pockets but on the morality of should not have received full legacy duties under this pro-
the middle classes :it touched the very life-blood of their posal in respect of any one portion of real property in Eng-
principle and honour, and although the tax had existed land until 1858, and the tax would, therefore, have an ex-
according to law since the establishment of the poor law, tremely short duration. But, in point of fact, the right
it had never been carried out in the various parishes in hon. gentleman was mistaken in the construction which he
assessing property for the poor on account of its mis- put upon my statement. I stated that this suceession-tax
chievous effects. As to the motion before the house, he equalised—if it be now uuequal—the burden that the in-
must say, the mere fact of giving the farmers a fixed come tax casts upon property as compared with intelligence
amount, to be ascertained by a certain standard, was an and skill. I stated and admitted that intelligence and
inestimable boon, and did much to place them in an ad- skill were too hardly pressed upon by the income tax as
compared with property. I stated that this measere would
vantageous position.
his eectify those. inequalities ;...and I. stated further, and be-
Mr. AGLIONBY could not refrain from expressing
lieve, _that tuts measure win rectify them to whatever de-
dissent from the sentiments uttered by the hon. member
you may call it into existence, without raising any
for Manchester, though he would go into the some lobby le
greeaangerous questions, and without unsettling your financial
with him. A more exaggerated and highly-coloured state-
system, or rendering it liable to repeated and incessant
meat had never been heard in this house than had been
disturbance ; but I am far from saying that the rectifica-
made by the hon. member with regard to the prosperity of
tion of inequalities in the income-tax is the only reason
the tenant farmers. He (Mr. Aglionby) had long lived in
upon which the justification of this measure is to be based.
the country, and knew something of the occupying tenants ,
It appears to me that there are many other reasons. In the
in most parts of England, and he must say from what had
been said by the hon. member that he should have thought first place, it is plain that the measure is essential to this
main condition of the financial measures of the Government
the hon. member had never known anything about an acre
—that, as far as in us lies, we will place a future Perna-
' of land in the possession of a tenant farmer. (Hear, hear.)
meat in a condition, at a given period, to part with the
If such statements, which only referred to particular parts
income tax if it thinks fit. This is one of the objects we have
of the country, were admitted sub silentio he feared much
irritation would be caused among, and just ground for
complaint would be given to, a class of persons who had
suffered severely of late. During some years,. so far from
the tenant farmers having a return for their capital, he
believed they had not been paid for the labour of them-
selves and their families—that, on the contrary, there had
been a direct and considerable loss, and that their rent had
been paid out of the capital. (Hear, hear.) That was so
iu the north, and in many parts of the south of England, and he asserted again, therefore, that, although there proposed to ourselves as essential to justify the proposal to
continuethe income tax for seven years—(hear)- -that while
we propose it for a term so considerable, we shall lay the
ground and prepare a train of causes which will supply
Parliament with the means of dispersing with it, if they
shall think fit, at the expiration of that term. (Loud
cheers.) That is another material reason for proposing the
tax upon successions; and without that tax upon successions
it would be impossible that we could hold eat to you any
other expectation of the termination of the income tax than
that series of vague andgeneral expectations which the coun -
might be exceptional cases, the condition of the tenant try has by this time, after so many repetitions of the experi-
farmers described by the hon. member for Manchester was
not the general condition of that class. (Hear, hear.) meat, learned to appreciate at their true value. (Laughter
and cheers.) Another purpose for which we propose this
Mr. KENDALL also thought he sheuhl not be doing his
tax is to provide a fund by means of which, during that in-
duty to his constituents if he avowed the statement of the terval of seven years, wo may carry into effect great and
hon. member for Manchester to go forth uncontradicted. In that part of the country which he had the honour to extended measures for the remission of indirect taxation.
(Cheers from the Ministerial side.) This is an important and
represent the tenant farmers were at this I/lenient barely
ekeing out a subsistence. (Hear, hear.) essential purpose—(hear)--but I do not hesitate to say
that, behind and independent of all these, there is a
Mr. HUME said that no person, whether farmer or shop- purpose yet more and more permanent in its character—
keeper, was entitled to begin business without capital, and namely, the removal of an anomaly which is unjust in its
it was yielding to a bad principle also to say that a farmer nature, which is galling to the public feeling—(hear, hear)
could not keep accounts. The farmers ought, one 'and all, —whicsh becomes more and snore galling from year to year,
to be capablelof keeping accounts, and then the same law, and which we believe it to be for the interest of all classes
applicable to the shopkeeper, ought to be applicable to to settle at once and permanently, being convinced that the
them—they ought not to be charged traderse than their longer you postpone that settlement the more difficult it
net income was shown to be, like other . HeThought will be to achieve, and the worse will be the terms upon
as the tax was atepresent levied upon farmers it might fall which it will be effected. (Hear, and cheers.) With these
short on some and might press heavily upon others ; but, views, and with the feeling that the present state of the
as he could not agree with the hon. member who had law cannot be held good in point of justice, I say that we
brought forward this question, that one-third would be by have a purpose in this proposal quite irrestive of all
any means an adetzuate proportion for the tenant-farmers those collateral ends, important as they, too, arc, which we
to pay, he should feel bound to oppose the motion. (Hear.) hope to secure by making the proposal at this moment.
Mr. MALINS thought that the hon. member for Cocker- Now, Sir, the first question I wish to press upon the ear-
mouth, after his remarks that night, ought to have voted nest and dispassionate consideration of the committee is
for protection, and he could account for his not doing so this—can we maintain the present law as it isl; In my
only on the strength of party feelings. The hon. member opi,ion it is totally impossible (Cheers.) I don't mean
for Montrose, again, who professed to be a friend of the that it is impossible to maintain it this-session or the next
people, would excluslo every man from becoming rich who session. I mean that it is impossible to look upon it as a
was not born with 10/. per aCre in his mouth. (Hear, portion of our fiscal system with any satisfaction, that the
hear, and No, no.) He thought that landlords in ge- public sentiment of the country is decidedly adverse to its
neral would prefer for a tenant a man with industty, skill, continuance in the present state, and that some day or
and energy to a man who had capital without those quail- other—and that at no distant period—it will and must
fications. (Hoar, hear.) The principle propounded by the inevitably be changed. (Hear, hear.) You cannot main-
hon. member for Montrose would, if acted on, be. subver- tain it ; and why ? Not because there is a clamour
sive of everything on which the greatness of this 'country against it. (Colonel Sibthorp here made an observation.
was founded. The hon. member for Montrose now ad- which was inaudible in the gallery.) lan sorry to scan-
mitted that the repeal of the corn law led to the confisca- dalise the gallant colonel. (Laughter.) I should have hoped
lion of the small farmers, though when that argument was that when I said we ought to look into the rights of
urged in the debates which took place on the repeal of that the question, and not merel to i)opular opinion, I should
law, it was denied that any such consequence would fol- have had some slight remembersble degree of his approval.
low. (Hear.) With regard to the question before the (Colonel Sibthorp, with great vehemence, " No, &,-, never."
house, he would vote for the amendment of his hon. friend, Loud laughter.) Well, I greatly regret that even those
on the ground of principle, though the relief which it principles to which I should have thought the hon. and
would give the farmer was so small, that he did not think gallant member would have given his assent should be so
it would be worth his hon. friend's while to press it to a poisoned by coming from my lips—(a laugh)---but, inc-
division. (Hear, hear.) According to a calculation which spective of the approval of the hon. gentleman, which it
he had made, the result of the amendment would be this— seems I cannot have, I must state the reasons why I think
that the tenant who paid 2001. a year rent would be re- it is erfectly impossible to defend the continuance of the
lieved from the income tax altogether. The tenant who present law. In the first place—and I state
first the rea-
ppaid 300/. would pay on 100/. instead of 1501., and would son which I conceive to be the weakest--I do not think it
save 1/. 9s. 4d. per annum. The tenant who paid 400/. a possible to defend the continuance of the present law, even
year would save 1/. ISs. 2d., and the tenant who paid as respects real property. (Hear.) I think, when we looke
600/. a year would save 2/. 6s. He believed the farmers, back to the time of Mr. Pitt--when we reflect upon'th
if asked on this subject, would say that they did not care proposal made by him nearly seventy years
feelago, thatn even
con-
one farthing for such a small amount of relief. (Hear.) sides- all that has since passedfiweitemurestsentexemption
Sir J. SHELLEY said the hon. gentleman seemed to
put himself forward as a teacher of landlords, but after the
t" nts and tendencies of this tiay. I speak
opinions he had given with respect to capital, he (Sir J. of the sentiments
Irneas a total exemption. I don't say that
oi'2lcreppgesaerds btreaal4)-eraoterat.A lissseueure position in the view
of the exemption. .
the condition of real pro-
there are not circumstances in
Shelley) should be sorry to be in his class. The honour-
able gentleman had misunderstood what had fallen from
amine the question in what precise manner we should deal
his honourable friend the member for Montrose. What he Pert,'
understood his hon. friend to mean was—what every land-
with it muter the measure we may be about to adopt,
which ought to be considered when w© come toex•
herd knew to be a fact—that the cause of the great distress
the agriculturists generally had
which existed amongst What I do say is, that a total exemption of real property
been that they .took farms without any regard to the
from a tax upon succession, which tax is made applicable
to personal
.property, and that at a high and heavy rate,
amount of capital which they possessed to work them pro-
is, in my view, neither an arrangement altogether justifinat-
fitably. (Hear, hear,) He thought that one of the great
benefits of free trade was that the farm
with reference to the permanency of our
invidious institutions. It
farmers could now work
their farms with 71. or 8/. an acre instead of 10/. in con-
than
ble, nor an arraneement which is safe, wise,
.or expedient
sequence of the fa”. in prices generally. (Hear, hear.)
indeed a bad business • it is .
valuable ;and therefore I should wish to get rid.thed
which attaches to it, ass
During the corn law farming was is an exemption which I think is far more
of
and just measure
like a come, if we can, to something
faaasrettlement of those
but at present no trade was more profitable. (Here,
hear.) Farmers now looked a great deal more than they
of the claims of real property, and to
invidious and odious character
..
used to do to the capital which was required to cultivate
at
a farm profitably; and there was a strong feeling growing claims.
defend, how much snore
exemption of settled personality?
in favour of tenant right, which would tend to the be
least—to defend the exemp difficultofrails IsropiVuly
yisvidieffiwc,elt
up claims. But if the exemp
nefit both of the landlord and the farmer. (Hear, hear.) slim, anti cheers.) Now,on w
t. of settled personalty from legacy
ti-olaiat in the world can be said
The principle of assessing the farmers on half theairtrenst t
on behalf of an exemele
I am inot aware of any areument, or the
had been agreed to when farming was not, so good
from
it
duty ? (Hoar.)
that can be brought in de-
as it was now, and he saw no reason for c epaling
when farming was so profitable. (Hear, hear.
ofanargaexeinmapatt'ion. With respect to the exemption
Mr. B. STANHOPE denied that farmers were in
for of real propel re the tireced
of
such
iy, it is a bond fide exemption. Settlements
z•-` le
are not made property impose of procuring
of
mal
in
°pet' •ybut with respect to personal property we
this exemption, because real is exempt whether
Westminster. On an avoi age of five years,pre-
prosperous condition described b y th e hon.or evenof member
threeor
less than they were settled or no ,
the operation osifisietheeescsaslreativhTayt,thraeaultrhe,:bulgeh
hear)—all,l to invent new
itnhetrheehataablacelesn ane iemat-
okfnoplevrstohnaati tibnetoraessttutennreessenonftilnauwaylleyrs
atandwotrhke
tvio gdilafnce
years, the profits of farm tig
they had
toWcoithnsriedgeaar eltwtool
points—first,thowaemreendmenNtvobfethbiesrhotteyfribeandd
mense increase in the personal property Of the country,
odes of escape from the legacy duty, d this anda n y
next,r ight tow bme
tabkeer a n
that a rbi
oughttar y
tassessment
b e dn
m .n
i .
so
bn e thed m
an with such
ent on half
. may be called all but fraudulent--arrange-
found great difficulty in proving that t
them as it were into another schedule.
would be
se:tethra°:Crneaa.:7o
(Hear,) w that
hat it was, difficulty
in proving
believedhe a.ssessmbyffaprulteinrsg;
made
We kno
nints NNVVhihlth are perf tl l of your
at
equalhned rfeo rent tntwas
this
seven
reason,not greater
justthat one, and he
legacy duty.h,
arrangenients are
the country
amongst
the best farmers in .
to which they can be referred, except that of e ad-ing- the
counts even was a total 11
thereeabsencew'l s seo f 1 ahe
, .. , ac y•aease ess, having no meaning
there .
an no justification in themselves, and no rational purpose
ire. a_ scarcely 1
any practical
benefit
to have all his affairs ex.
(Hear, hear.) The farmer'esfibtoatosteebibnri.ghtAofmasasnpewalbo wasbutof a
consideration in army think
that settle-
one engagements
nssoorsu.chanaced
soounmitusuates Now, some persona vthat there
'ants are Pade upon ata
would enable them to e
posed. Nine farmers
those who apneale'd that ho knew It
ersoou bt before r e ten
the ek eal:ste
mps, but I apprehend that is
were the questions put to was red I no answer tll A
one instance in which a farmer as sow many bees • aa. Iy belief is that the stamps upon many
his garden, and how much honey he got from of these settlements aro of such small value that they are
he kept in
didnotask
teem ? (Laughter.) lie
the farmer on account of losses ehe simply contended it 'settlement stamp as it now stands,—it is at the rate, I
was not fair to assess him as he was assessed at preunt, think, of Ss. per cent. For 58. per cent., then, you get a
theand, seeking for bins no favour and no affection, lie en- document which ascertains the existence of your property
treated the committee to place him in the same position as at your (lea th, and determine its course, thereby standing
rest of the community. (Cheers.) . iit lieu of a will and of letters of administration. Ire
Mr. VANSITTART replied.
The committee than divided est this privilege enough, independently of evading
lee 'legacy duty? (Hear, hear.) Is there not another
Against it
For the amendment. ............... .
obate
luty called the probate duty ? Why, the pr i
'uty of itself, 'quite irrespective of legacy dut amounts
_ . _ . . .

60
......... 120

Majority .......................
The original resolution was. then agreed to
LEGACY DITTIES..
The CHAIRMAN then proceeded to on the subject of the legacy duties read the resolution
rupted by , when he was inter-
Mr. DISRAELI, who said th
him (Mr. Freshfield) had
giat an hon, memo er behind
ven notice of an an tendment
upon that part of the resolution at which the eilairman
had just arrived, and he (Mr. Disraeli) wished to know
whether whether the Ohl*. 11
••-•

60

from- 2to 3i5 taking extreme c-ale-2, 4 pey; cent.
hon. member sitting behind the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer here made an observation in a low tone.) Yes, in
some cases the probate duty is beyond 3 per coot. Is it not,
then, quite privilege and benefit enough that by paying 58.
per cent. upon a settlement a man should escape the pro-
bate duty of 2,3, or 4 per cent., without being able to
escape a totally independent impost of 2 or 3 per cent.
more ? (Hear, hear.) I think it is perfectly monstrous to
maintain that, because of the stamp upon
esentrtloebmateentds:
tnyo
legacy duty should be paid by property which has been
settled. It seems to me a very good bargain—indeed, I
should say, if we were now dealing with
too good a bargain—that nersons Annld