The Sun.
London, England, 1862-05-09 00:00:00

COURT OF ADMIRALTY (IRELAND).

Sir E. GROGAN asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland
if he intended to introduce any bill during the present ses-
sion of Parliament for extending the jurisdictien, amending
the form of procedure, and payment of salaries in lieu of
fees of the officers of the Court of Admiralty in Ireland.
Sir R. PEEL said it was not intended to introduce any
bill of that character this session.
SUPPRESSION OF THE SLAVE TRADE.

Mr. W. FORSTER asked the Under Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs whether her Majesty's Government
had succeeded hi negotiating a fresh treaty with the Govern-
ment of the United States for the suppression of the slave
trade; and, if so, whether he was prepared to lay such
treaty upon the table of the house ?

Mr. LAYARD said that a treaty of a satisfactory char-
acter in relation to this subject had been entered into, and
that he had no objection to lay it on the table.

MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT.

Mr. M. GIBSON, in reply to a question, said he would
not bring on this bill this evening.

CUSTOMS AND INLAND REVENUE BILL.

On the order fcr the second reading of this bill,
Sir S. NORTHCOTE having taken objection to certain
items in the Budget of the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
said that he had to complain of the financial theory pro-
pounded by .the right hon. gentleman, namely, that he
was responsible for any expenditure recommended to the
Government. In making this observation he was only
reflecting the impression which prevailed in the country,
for the community at large looked forward to the financial
minister as being responsible for any measures relating to
finance, or at all events to Government, who had adopted
the scheme of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
He contended that it, was a most unconstitutional doctrine
that Government should release themselves from the respon-
sibility of such financial changes as those recommended y
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and he referretd of tohis
the
authority of the late Sir Robert Peel in sup
views. The Chancellor of the Exchequer wasp.coornsidered
to be the exponent and perpetuator of the policy of that
statesman, but he denied that he was entitled to that cha-
racter. He was only a follower in a half sense of that
statesman. In illustration of that statement he said that
the policy of the late Sir Robert Peel was always to have
a surplus in our expenditure, and he denounced in strong
terms the removal of theduty on paper, which he believed the
late distinguished statesman, to whom he referred, would
never have assented to under the financial position of the
national exchequer, at a time when the impost was removed.
He condemned the policyof the Government as regarded the
expenditure on military works, which he contended were
quite unnecessary in the existing relations with foreign
countries. (Hear, hear.) There was no chance of
any country attacking us, and,
according to the policy
of this country, which was that of non-interven-
tion, there was no great chance of us invading other
nations. Notwithstanding this fact the country was called
on to provide a large military establishment to meet ima-
ginary dangers. In reference to Italy, it was most
desirable that that country should work out her free-
dom. (Cheers from both sides of the house.) In
carrying out this object difficulties might have to be en-
countered, and this country might have to be called on to
interfere, but it would not be in the character of an armed
mediation. Having adverted to the progress of science in
regard to military operations, which had so rapidly super-
seded the old tactics of the military system, ho admitted
that the defects of our system were fully developed
the events which had taken place in the Russian war, but
at the same time these defects had now been remedied.
(Hear, hear.) Under all these circumstance, he
felt bound, without any party spirit, to object in the
strongest terms to the military expenditure proposed by the
Government for the present year.

Dir. W. FORS'fill pronounced a warm eulogium upon
the Manchester speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
which he said encouraged the hope that the house would
be called upon to consider whether the expenditure—parti-
cularly the naval and military—was not susceptible of re-
duction with a due regard to the honour and safety of the
country.

Mr. HUBBARD called attention to the unequal pressure
of the income tax upon persons in the receipt of fluctuating
incomes, and urged the necessity of adopting some measures
of redress.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER disclaimed
the exaggerated and highly-coloured interpretation put
upon his Manchester speech by Sir S. Northcote. So far
from repudiating the responsibility which belonged to his
department, he fully accepted it, and was ready to assert it
in the case as well of the Government as of Parliament. He
argued that the circumstances of the country at the present
moment were exceptional ; and they were these--an in-
creased war expenditure, the distress Prevailing in the

manufacturing districts, and the military demands for
China, New Zealand, and North America, all of which
were elements which must act in a greater or less degree
upon the state of the finances. Yet, notwithstanding those
exceptional circumstances, the expenditure of the country
had been somewhat reduced, and he had ventured to re-
commend that we should continue, with as much vigour as
possible, but all due caution, in the same course. 11e denied
that he had departed from the principles of the late Sir R.
Peel, and in prcof referred to the fact that in 1842 the right
hon. baronet repealed faxes to a large amount, and ended
the year with a deficit of £1,.500,000. With regard to the
charge that the Government had recklessly disposed of
funds from which a surplus might have been provided, and
that if the paper duty had been retained the surplus would
have been more than a million, he did not believe that the
house would have allowed them to maintain such a surplus ;
and the remission of the paper duty stood as an act done
by the House of Commons, and from its consequences the
house could not escape. He pointed to the effects of the
commercial policy of the G. vernment in an extended trade,
enhanced employment, the generally improved condition of
the people, and, notwithstanding all adverse. influences, the
recovery of from £BOO,OOO to £1,000,000 a year of revenue
since the year 1869.

Mr. DISRAELI congratulated the house and the coiun-.
try upon the admission of the Chancellor of the Exchequer
that he was ready to assume the responsibility attaching to
his office, and defend and vindioate the financial policy of
the Government. The right hon. gentleman had declared
that no government could have retained a surplus of a
million without repealing the paper duty, lut he had
omitted to state that whilst applying his surplus to the
abolition of that duty he had neglected to pay a million of
Exchequer bills then due, and he had not denied that he
had exhausted the extraordinary resources of the country
to the amount of £4,000,000 in two years, that he had com-
menced the year with a million and a half of surplus, and,
although two millions cf terminable annuities had fallen
in, that he concluded the year with a deficit of two millions
and a half. The bill now before the house proposed the
largest amount of annual taxation that was ever contained
in one bill, and it was not a measure to be passed, of course,
as if it were no more than a bill of indemnity. What were
the exceptional circumstances that justified such an enor-
mous amount of taxation ? And why were we expending
so much upon armaments? Our self-defence was adequate
and complete, and we had no reason to fear invasion. We
had no great object of material importance to attain; for
the country was in possession of everything that the pride
of a rational community could desire. Yet we had the
prospect of a deficit falling upon exhausted resources and a
declining trade. It was quite clear, therefore, if the ex-
penditure was to be maintained at its present rate, there
must be an appeal to fresh taxation ; and upon whom
would that fall ? During a time of peace we were bearing a
war expenditure, whilst we had a financial system that was
founded on a peace expenditure. We had been increasing
the expenditure to the war rate, whilst we had been gradu-
ally and continuously destroying the sources of permanent
revenue. What, then, must follow ? The maintenance of
such an expenditure must produce increased taxation, and
that must fall upon that milch cow, the landed interest. He
believed that the object of our increased armaments was to
maintain our influence in the councils of Europe, and that
it was the jealousy and misunderstanding between France
and England which had led to them, and which he could
only account for by the circumstancethat the two countries
having the same objects, contemplated those objects in a
different light. This was essentially the case with respect
to the question of Southern Italy, in reference to which the
two Governments were in accord on the main principle at
issue. Seeing, then, that fear of invasion was an absolute
illusion, that there was no point of importance that England
had to attain, and that the councils of Europe in which we
wanted to exercise an influence consisted only of England
and France—the latter cur cordial ally—it ended in this,
that we were arming against that ally. Oh, but this was
called governing by moral power; but four or five years of
such government by moral power would necessarily lead us
to a European war. And how should we then find ourselves
prepared, with our financial reserve exhausted ? Why, there
was no fleet or armament that gave England such influence
in the councils of Europe as the consciousness that,the in-
come tax was to a virgin state. He called uponthe Govern-
ment, then, to reverse their policy, to come to a really cor-
dial understanding--a sensible as well as cordial under-
standing—with the only power which, with itself, formed
the councils of Europe, and put an end those swollen and
bloated armaments which had brought the country into its
present state of financial embarrassment. It was only by
following out a policy of conciliation, not of an overbear-
ing and dictatorial character, t)sat we could establish truly
friendly feelings of France, and that substantial and per-
manent relief could be supplied to the taxpayers of the
country.

Lord PALMERSTON said the right hon. gentleman
appeared to have forgotten some of the antecedents of his
own party, and had talked of bloated armaments, although
the Government of which he was the loader in this house
took great credit to itself, in the person of Sir John Pak-
ington, for reconstructing the navy and augmenting those
bloated armaments. The right hon. gentleman had objected
to naval, to military, and to moral power; but in the ab-
sence of these it was hard to say what rower we were to
exercise to retain our influence among the nations of the
world. He also said we were in a perpetual state of hostility
with France, the power with which we professed to be in
amicable alliance ; but this was not the fact, as was proved
by the frank and open communication between the two Go-
vernments in relation to American affairs, and more especi-
ally in the matter of the Trent. It could not be expected,
however, but that questions would arise which might be
looked at in different lights by England and France, ac-
cording as they viewed them with reference to their respec-
tive interests, and this sufficiently accounted for the differ-
ence in their views respecting the occupation of Rome ani
the affairs of Italy. He should have been ashamed of the
Government if they had not expressed their sympathy with
the cause of Italian independence, but they had not em-
ployed any portion of those bloated armaments for the pur-
pose of enforcing their ideas on that subj ect. He should
like to know where the right bon. gentleman was when the
navy and army estimates were proposed. As an economist,
as a reformer, as the patron of the gentlemen below the
gangway on the opposite side of the house, as the supporter
of the Pope, and as the mouthpiece of the Government of
France, how did the right hon. gentleman reconcile it wi h
his duty not to have raised his voice from his place against
those bloated armaments ? He (Lord Palmerston) was as
sensible as any one of the necessity of practising real eco-
nomy in the public expenditure ; but economy was a distri-
butive virtue, and must be tempered with prudence. He
also agreed that the keystone of our foreign policy was a
friendly alliance with France; but without anticipating
attack, that object could only be attained by meeting her
thataahad
on such terms of perfect equality of power that our councils
mshoorueldi r
on
no t bheipassbcrailibdedintgo
tthhaenwe
dictates of fear.
had, so
it Francew a total
perversion of facts to say that the English navy was a
bloated service as compared with that of other countries.
Our relations with France were as friendly as it was possi-
ble for the two countries to be. and the policy of the Govern-
ment was simple and ?lain. It was the cultivation of friend-
ship with
every foreign power that was disposed to cultivate
it with us.
After some observations from Colonel Dickson, Mr.
Lindsay (who condemned the foreign policy of the Govern-
ment, as most dangerous with regard both to America and
Italy), Mr. Whiteside, and Mr. Ball,
Sir W. JOLLIFFE said the noble lord had expressed
disapproval of the use, by Mr. Disraeli, of the term "bloated
armaments," but he believed there was hardly a man in the
house who would not say that the armaments both of
France and oflthis country were equally deserving the ap-
pellation. With regard to the bill under consideration, be
objected to the manner in which it proposed to tramper with
that great instrument of defence, the income tar..
Some observations by Mr. GRIFFITH on foreign policy
brought the debate to a close, and the bill was read a second
time.

The house then went into committee of supply, and
agreed to the vote of £342,000 for education.
On the vote of £7,017 for the Royal Dublin Society,
Mr. DILLWYN moved that the Chairman report pro.
gress.

The motion was resisted by the Government, but on a
division it was carried by 65 to 59, and the house resumed.
Tho Companies, &c., Bill, the Public Workg and Har-
bours Act Amendment Bill, the Oxford University Bill,
and the Drainage (Ireland) Bill were severally read a
second time.

The Red Sea and India Telegraph Company Bill and the
Smoke Nuisance (Metropolis) Acts Amendment J3ill were
respectively read a third time and passed.
The house then adjourned.

BANK OF ENGLAND•

An Account, pursuant to
cap. 32, for the week endix
ci May, 1862: _

Le Act 7th and Bth Victoria,
on 'Wednesday, the 7th day

otes issued . 05 G v went Debt £11,015,000
t
3.634 (100
Goldi
I &Bu lion 16,402,705'
S 775 2 ,D 7 AO:er:;:ne.urn t i
Silver Bullion

£31,052,705
BAsKiNG DEPARTMENT.
Goverment Seen-
Proprietors' CaPi-
...x14.653.000 rities (including
lal ............... 3,103,441 Dead WeirhtAn-
Rest . , ...... . „I,_ nuity) .£11,231,368
Public DcPo,,six`si Other Securities 17,032,846
. p-
eluding -v, c -
Savings,
I Notes
Ler,
nks, Commis" Gold and Silver 863,040
missionersot Na- Coin
tional Debt, and
Dividend Ac-
counts) 7,503,911
Other Deposits 13,860,643
SevenY
other 1)a
Bills

£31,052,705

£39,731,379
31. :

£39,731,379
RSHALL, Chief Cashier.

May 8, 1862.

EXTENSIVE FIRE AND DESTRUCTION OF Pll°-
YERTY IN HOLLAND.—A telegram received by a mercan-
tile firm in this city, dated 7.41 p.m. Wednebday, announces
the total:destruction. by fire of Enschede, one of the prin-
cipal manufacturing towns in Holland, with all its manu-
factories. Enschede contaiced a population
9,000 souls..--,A4 of 8,000 or
anchester Guardian.