The Sun.
London, England, 1854-05-16 00:00:00

PRUSSIA.

HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.)

THE EMBODIMENT OF THE MILITIA.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE—I have to move an
humble address to her Majesty, returning her Majesty
the humble thanks of this house for her constitutional
message, and expressing to her Majesty the just sense
we entertain of her Majesty's care for the security of the
country, manifested by the gracious declaration she has
made that she will call out and embody the whole or
such part of the militia as to her Majesty may seem fit.
Earl GREY—I do not rise with any intention of ob-
jectmg to the resolution, but at the same time I think we
(right to know somewhat more of the intentions of her
Majesty's Government. It has been pointed out to me
that if this measure shall be adopted in the manner that
it is commonly thought it would be adopted, an act of
very questionable justice will be done to some of those
who have volunteered into the militia. One colonel of
militia mentioned his own particular case. Soon after
the act of 1852 was passed, when it was intended to em-
body the militia in the county to which I have adverted,
an attempt was made by a number of persons belonging
to the Peace Society to prevent men enrolling themselves
in the militia, and the argument was, if you enrol your-
self in the militia, it is promised that you will not be
called out for duty except the country is actually in
danger ; but when you are once enrolled, those terms
will not be adhered to, and the engagement you have
contracted will be made more severe than you intended.
'The gentleman told me that this produced a great
impression, and that he attended a meeting, and told
them they migLt safely volunteer for the militia,
that the terms were defined by act of Parliament,
and there was no danger of those terms being
broken. This had a considerable effect in inducing
them to enrol themselves for the militia, and to advise
persons to enlist because it was considered that they had
au act of Parliament to guarantee that they would not
be called out except under certain circumstances. But
now comes a new act of Parliament that takes away that
guarantee, and alters the circumstances under which
their permanent services may be required, and with wages
at 3s. a day they find themselves exposed to be called
out for a longer period than they thought, at a rate of
pay of only ls. a day. (Hear.) Owing to the confu-
sion that sometimes takes place, I was not aware, when
my noble friend moved the first reading, of what subse-
quently occurred, until I found by the votes that the
bill was read a second time, and put through all its
other stages on the next day at one o'clock ; and, there-
ore, I had not an opportunity of snaking any remarks
upon the subject. (Hear, hear.) Therefore I think
this is the proper opp ertunity to make these remarks.
I do not object to the militia being called out if the
Government think fit , but I wish to know whether, as
is usual in cases where any changes are made in the
regulation of any of our armed forces, care is taken not
to alter the terms of the engagement to the disadvan-
tage of those who contracted it. llear, hear.) I wish
to know, if the militia are called out, whether those
men who volunteered on the faith of a different engage-
;tient and consider themselves aggrieved by the alter-
ation made in the terms of it, will be given the option
of retiring from the force when the term for which they
enlisted is over.

The Costitutionnel collects the opinions expressed
in some of the German papers as to the probable
policy of Prussia on the Eastern question, and re-
marks upon them as follows :
"It will be seen that public opinion in Germany de-
clares itself not only against a policy which would make
Prussia an active satellite of Russia, but even against
a system of indecision, indolence, and temporisation
which would isolate her for a time from the action of
Europe. She is called upon to declare herself promptly
and frankly against the Emperor Nicholas, and it is
distinctly observed that two plicies are no longer pos-
sible for her. She must either adopt an independent
and European policy in the sense of France, England,
and Austria, or a Russian policy, that would make her
a vassal of the empire of the Czars. The moment for
the Cabinet of Berlin to pronounce itself openly cannot
he distant, and when it shall have arrived it will be in
the crusade of coalised Europe against Rissian barba-
rism that we shall find the Eagle of Prussia."
In the sitting of the Germanic diet of the 11th,
England and France caused to be communicated
the treaty of alli tnce concluded between them on
the 10th April with respect to the Eastern war.

ITALY.

THE RELATIONS BETWEEN PIEDMONT

The Duke of NEWCASTLE—I cannot give my
noble friend the assurance that her Majesty's Govern-
ment contemplate any such extreme course as that he
mentioned and recommended—namely, allowing those
persons that enlisted to retire front the militia, if they
state that they have an objection to the act that was
passed two or three days ago ; but it is the intention of
the Government to meet the case in another way, which
I hope will be satisfactory to your lordships. For the
first year your lordships are aware that it is not intended
to embody the whole of the militia force. At present it
is the intention of the Government to embody a force of
about 15,000 men, and those regiments will be selected
who have expressed already their perfect readiness to be
embodied, and in some instances have even wished to be
embodied. (Hear, hear.) Then it will not be necessary
in some instances to embody whole regiments, and in
that case leave of absence will be given to those who
cannot from their vocations come forward, so that no
serious inconvenience, if any at all, will be felt. (Hear,
hear.) So far as we have at present the means of ascer-
taining, there is the greatest readiness on the part of
those regiments that are intended to be called out to
answer to the call that we propose to make upon them.
The Earl of EGLINTON—Some time ago we were
informed it was the intention to call out the Irish and
Scotch militia. (A. noble lord—Not the Irish). And I
wish to know if that is to be done by a separate bill ?
The Duke of NEWCASTLE—The other Militia Act
en, bles the Government to have the militia embodied in
case of invasion, but this is not a case of invasion ; it is
a case of war, and it was necessary to have this second
act enabling the Government to call out the militia in
the case of war. The same power will be given in the
Scotch bill.

AND ROME.

The Earl of DERBY—I think there is great force in
the argument of the noble earl opposite that the altera-
tion should as little as possible have a retrospective cha-
racter, or appear to involve any breach of faith with
those who volunteered into the militia under a (Efferent
act, for the fundamental principle of the Militia Bill, and
that to which it owed its success, was that the measure
should he entirely and purely voluntary. It was a mea-
sure calling for the warm and patriotic feeling of the
country, and it is right that no person should have rea-
son to suppse that he was entrapped into any engage-
ment different from that which he originally entered in-
to. (Hear.) From the answer that has been given by
the noble duke, though not technical or in terms, we may
expect that the result to which the noble earl pointed
will be practically obtained, because, if I understand
the noble duke rightly, though he will not lay down the
principle that persons having been engaged for the militia
under certain provisions are absolved from that term of
service on which they entered, yet that the Government,
in the selection of regiments for embodiment, will select
' those regiments that are willing and desirous to serve ;
and, further, that in other regiments consisting of 900
or 1,000 ►nen, they would be enabled to obtain 500 or
600 men who would be willing to volunteer. (Rear,
hear.) I hope the noble duke will set me right if I have
not correctly interpreted him.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE—Yon have not in any
respect misinterpreted what I said. The only difference
is that you stated it more fully and clearly than I did
myself.
E irl GREY—I think that to adhere most scrupu-
lously to good faith in those matters is a point of the
greatest importance, for our whole system of enlistment
for the army, militia, and navy, and the success of the
whole of the present arrangements. really rest upon this
ground, that confidence shall be placed in the State, and
that under no circumstances will strict good faith be de-
patted from by the State in its dealings with those who
contract with them. Hitherto this country has kept a
high character upon that subject, and I shall be glad
that nothing shall be done to detract from that character.
The resolution in answer to the address was then put
by the Lord Chancellor and adopted.

Another long debate took place in the Piedmon-
tese Chamber of Deputies, on the 10th, on the oc-
casion of a vote of 37,000 f. for the Sardinian Mini-
ster at Rome. M. Robecchi, having objected to
the vote on the ground that the Roman Govern-
ment treated Piedmont with disrespect, and ought
not, therefore, to have a Sardinian Minister accre-
dited to it, Count Solaro della Margherita, took up
the defence of the government at Rowe, and con-
demned that of Piedmont, observing that great
thanks were due to the generous man who now go-
verned France for the material aid he afforded to the
Supreme Pontiff. " The star of Napoleon," ex-
claimed the orator, " will not fade so long as the
colours of France float over the Seven Hills, not
in token of conquest, but of protection." Gene-
ral Debormida, Minister of Foreign Affairs, strenu-
ously defended the Sardinian Government in the
course it was pursuing with Rome, adding, that it
was its wish to be on a friendly foong with Rome,
provided the dignity, independence, and liberty of
the nation were suitably maintaintained. "As for
ma," said the Minister in conclusion, " I desire
the liberty of the Church, of religion, of Catho-
licism ; but whether before friends or enemies,
when exaggerated principles are sought to be
defended, I shall always advocate the union and
concord of the powers of the State, and stability
in the commonwealth." M. Depretis remarked
that conciliation would be a very good course if
Rome had not ever been, and still was, the irrecon-
cilable enemy of Italian independence.—To this M.
Ratazzi, Keeper of the Seals, replied that the prin-
ciple of Italian independence was not under con-
sideration at present, and that the Church had
nothing in common with the tricolour. Whenever
the latter required to be defended, the Ministry
would always be in the vanguard. Mr. Fariui
spoke in favour of the vote, observing that the
jurisdiction over souls belonged to the spiritual
power, and that the civil power might be indepen-
dent without encroaching on the limits of the spi-
ritual. Count Cavour, President of the Council,
then rose, and declared that the Government had
proceeded with the greatest prudence in its nego-
tiations with Rome. As soon as he (Count Cavour)
learnt that Rome showed herself favourable to
the Sardian Charge d'Affaires, he immediately
created him a minister, and Rome, in return,
appointed a cardinal. Would the Chamber, now
that matters were on a better footing, paralyse all
the negotiations ? Reforms were necessary, no
doubt, but they must be effected with prudence
and moderation. The nomination of a minister at
Rome did not in the slightest degree impair the
dignity ;of the nation. What Government had not,
at somei time or.otlier, bad difficulties.withßothe ?
Tile Sardinian Government did not licmiie:s-s; an ab-
solute, an excessive devotedness to the Holy See,
but it professed the respect that was due to it.

VIPE I) lAL PARLIA kIENT
was one hundred millions, and if a duty of 5 per cent. was
• imposed on imports it would give five millions, anti fall
equally on all classes. Barley was to the agriculturists
what cotton was to the manufacturer; all agricultural scien-
tific improvement turned on the cultivation of barley, and
it was an article with which the foreigner could least inter-
fere. Why not interrupt the process of industry by laying
a tax on cotton yarn, as well as on barley? (Hear.) What
was the effect of the repeal of the corn laws? The effect ,
was to introduce into this- country eight or ten millions
quarters of grain per annum, and that had the effect of ,
lowering the price. There was no objection to the repeal
of the corn laws but that. They told them at the time
they repealed the corn laws that they could not have a
Parliamentary price for their corn, but they enforced upon
them a Parliamentary price fcr their barley. If this tax
were repealed the consumption of barley would increase at
least threefold, and if they had an increased demand for
barley, agriculturists would oease to grow so much wheat
and oats as they did now, which would increase the price
of wheat, and therefore he contended that the repeal of
the malt tax would be a compensation for the repeai of the
corn laws. By their fiscal laws they depressed the price of
barley at least ss. a quarter, and they also depressed the
price of wheat and oats, and now they were going to aggra-
vate this evil. He did not know whether this were meant
as a b10..v to a class, or a blow to a party. He was at a
loss to determine why it was done, unless it were some
retaliation for what had been done on that side of the
house. He had told them what this tax did for the land ;
ho would now tell them what it did for the people. If
there were no tax, and no licenses, beer could be sold
at twopence a gallon. Of the surplus beyond the two prices
at present charged, only one-fourth went to the Exchequer.
The tax cost the country not only the five millions that
went to the Exchequer, but twenty millicns, the difference
going to swell the profits of the brewers anti iu other ways.
This day the great brewers had issued a notice, raising the
price of beer about three times as much as the increase of
the tax. The tax on malt he considered to be equivalent to
a direct tax of 25s an acre on every cultivated acre in the
kingdom. This was what they called free trade. (Opposi-
tion cheers.) He would now show the.effect of the tax iu a
moral point of view. In 1705 the tax on malt in Ireland
was 2s 6d a bushel, and in 1801 it was Cs 6d, and the con-
sumption, which at the former period was 1.24,000 qrs,
had decreased at the latter period to 173,900 quarters.
They must not, therefore, complain if Irishmen had taken
to the consumption of whiskey. In Scotland, too the great
consumption of whiskey was to be attributed to the same
cause. He contended, therefore, that in a moral point of
view this was an injudicious and imprudent measure. He
had presented many petitions on this subject, and amongst
others he had presented two from clergymen in Essex for
the repeal of the malt tax, because, as these reverend gen-
tlemen said, the effect of the tax v as to drive the poor
man to the beer-house, he not being able to have his beer
at home as he ought to have, brewed by his wife. In 1831
a committee of that house was appointed to examine into
the causes and increase of drunkenness, and a magistrate
from Oxfordshire was brought up to state his opinion. He
stated that he had written to fifteen clergymen asking their
opinion as to the means of preventing drunkenness, and
fourteen of them had answered that the best mode was to
repeal the malt tax. He entreated them, therefore, not to
aggravate this source of evil by increasing the tax. He
did not ask theta now to repeal the tax ; he should have
asked them, but for the grave circumstances of the country,
but he seked them not to increase the sources of the evil he
had pointed out. In conclusion the hon. member moved
that the bill be read a second time that day six months.
Mr. STANHOPE objected to the bill because Ihe malt
tax was excessive in amount—because it was laid on un-
fairly, and upon one class only—and because there was no
necessity for increasing it for the purposes of the war, it
being raised to repair the financial blunders of the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer.
Lord MONCK contended ths t this was not a tax which
fell exclusively on the producer, and, as regarded the con-
sumer, he urged that barley held an exceptional position,
and that the vat iation of duty would not cause consump-
tion to vary at a rate at all equal to that which was shown
when the process took place in reference to other articles.
He defended the tax as a temporary one, designed to aid
in prov:ding means for the war, and which, therefore, had
been very properly chosen, as calculated to fall on as large
a portion of the population as possible.
Colonel GILPIN described the tax as one which pressed
with undue severity on the la, ded interest, and as he be-
lieved that consumption would decrease iu consequence of
the imposition, the revenue would not profit in proportion
to the hardship inflicted.
Mr. WARNER had not felt much enthusiasm for the
war, or sympathy for our ancient ally, but the question
now was one of raising the requisite means, and he could
not have supposed that any amendment would have been
moved in opposition to that object. He defended the
financial operations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
and expressed an earnest hope that the amendment would
be withdrawn, as it would be misunderstood on the Con-
tinent.
The Marquis of GRANBY said that the opposition to
the tax was not an opposition to the war, although he con-
sidered the latter neither just nor necessary ; but we had
now engaged in it, and there would be no disposition to
incommode Ministers in obtaining supplies. It was, how-
ever, necessary to see that the best means of supply were
resorted to. The increased malt duty ought to be resisted,
because it did not fulfil the condition that a national war
should be borne by the mass of the people, but fell upon
an already heavily burdened mass. He argued, in oppo-
sition to Lord Monck, that the tax did fall upon the pro-
ducer, anti cited lit'Culloch to show its mischievousness to
the agriculturist in diminishing consumption. He taunted
the Government with the incessant warnings they had re-
ceived from the Osposition as to the impolicy of surren-
dering taxes which would be required in time of war, and
with the assurance that had been given in return, that the
new principles reciprocity had made war impossible.
Mr. P. URQUHART, as a free-trader, gave his support
to the amendment, and could not see why barley, which
was exposed to a severer ordeal than any other article,
should have an additional tax put upon it.
Mr. CROSSLEY, though an abstainer from all in-
toxicating drinks, kept them on his table for his friends,
and had constituents who disagreed with him, and there-
fore he had a right to speak on the subject. He abused
beer, called it the death of life, and not its bread, and
said there was no real strength given by intoxicating
liquids. He contended that this was not a farmer's question,
the tax being altogether a consumer's tax, and he should
like to see any such amendment as this come from the
right quarter, namely, from the consumers. But the re-
presentatives of large towns made no complaint, and he
should support the Government.
Mr. BENTINCK begged a second time to enter his
strenuous protest against a proposition which could be re-
conciled with neither justice, honesty, nor consistency.
This was an attempt to re impose protective duties, and it
it were right, it would show that all the free-trade doc-
trines which had so long been preached were a delusion.
It was part of a system intended to withdraw taxation
from towns, and throw it upon the country.
Mr. J. BALL said that, as science had not yet taught
us how to carry on a cheap war, means must bo found.
He believed that there was no imposition for this purpose
to which the country would more cheerfully submit than
one on liquors There were certainly special objections to
the increase on Irish spirits, but as an Irish member he
should not on that account take any coarse which might
imperil the whole scheme of the Government, nor could
Ireland complain of financial injustice in the present
budget. He could not comprehend how it could be argued
that the malt tax was not a tax on the consumer, no did
he believe that t he farmers would object to bear their share
of a just war, so necessary to the honour of the country.
Mr. BARROW said that the chief injustice of the tax
was, that it fell upon the farmer, both as producer and
consumer, and it would especially fall upon the small
farmer who had so recently been brought under the income
tax. He wanted to know how the English farmer paying
cent. per cent, upon a main article of his produce could
enter into " unrestricted competition" with the foreigner.
The malt tax, moreover, interfered with the cultivation of
the land in the must advantageous mode, namely, for
barley. These were reasons for his supporting the amend-
ment, anti though it was no business of his to suggest
other subjects of taxation, he was convinced that it should
be laid upon foreign rather than native articles. He was
also swayed by the consideration that, by making beer
costly, you drove the humbler classes to a worse liquid.
Mr. WILKIN ON could not see bow free trade could
properly be brought into the discussion when an article
was either wholly produced at home or wholly produced
abroad.

Mr. NEWDEGATE refused to accept the implied defi-
nition of free trade, free from Excise or Customs. He con-
ceived the definition, which included the latter only, was
mere nonsense. He lamented this proposition of Govern.
_ _ _ _ a id the hr