The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-28 00:00:00

PLACES.

------
On the motion that the house at ;its rising do adjourn
to Monday next,
Mr. DISRAELI rose and said—l am 'most unwilling
to take advantage of this motion at any aloe for the
purpose of entering into a general discussion upon any
subject, and nothing but a sense of public duty would
induce me now to take this opportunity of adverting to
the topic to which I am about to refer. In doing so, I
will endeavour to confine myself as much as possible to
an inquiry of her Majesty's Government, making one
or two remarks merely in order to bringthtehesuobjtetoctintaon.
their attention, and the attention of the house. That
subject is, the state of our relations with
Porte. The house will recollect, that early in the spring
of the present year, considerable alarm was created, not
tohnelyariiiiivthalisocfoaunnterxyt,rbaourtdiinnaortyheerrabswtaasatseys
I.oofinE
RuruosPesia%bayt
was states
in Some degree
aarmration
aClol
anys
et adn, tbi ny o
theple —e
obnufitd
etnhta td
declaration
though apparently commenced
with circumstances of great pomp and urgency, did not
persons in au-
thority, that this mission,
after all refer to any subject of general interest and im-
portance, but merely had reference to the relations which
rebetthweeen
ought
Church,to subsistwim w e the members of the Greek
holy places at Jerusalem.subjects of the Porte, and the
sion which obtainedlcurrncljy,ntdheer
pthuabtliegemnienrdal
asiisnuprareeds;
I think I may say,
happened about sixaspectof tranquillity. But it so
weeks. ago or a little more, that Col.
a time, in the absence of Lord Strat-
ford, our ambassador, the British Minister at Constanti-
nople—agentleman
have been in any way placed in connection with him will
bear
witness, that he is a man of great ability
sessing considerable knowledge of the country in which
he has been placed, in a very responsible positions it is
happened that about the period I have stated, Colonel
Rose suddenly felt it his duty to telegraph to the British
Admiral at Malta, requesting the immediate presence of
the British fleet at the Dardanelles, it being at the same
time announced that the French ambassador at Constan.
tinople had despatched a message to the French squad-
ron at Toni" •requesting its immediate presence in the
same locality. These circumstances immediately revived
i the alarm that had previously been so prevalent, but

those circumstances were, of course, duly considered by
her Majesty's Government, and it was generally under-
stood that they had, from their knowledge of the facts,
arrived at the opinion that there was no necessity for the
appeal made by Colonel Rose to the British admiral, and
the departure of the British fleet from Malta, which, ac-
cording to ithe instructions given to the British admiral,
could not take place without first communicating.w h
the authorities at home, never, therefore, occurred an
the French fleet arrived in the vicinity of Constantinople
while the English fleet remained at Malta. Well,
the country placing a wise confidence, as
I think, in
those who are charged with the responsibilitiess of the
high office of her Majesty's ministers on such übee
atnd
did not press the Government for disclosures,
seemed inclined to think that the view taken by
Coloneltu
Rose, and upon which he had acted, in his despatch
the British admiral at Malta, had been somewhat
rds Lord preci-
pitate in its character. Shortly
Strat-
ford, her Majesty's ambassador toaitt_hereuwPsasoiarute
Constantinople, which he found the ri
eAmbassadord a t
Extraordinary had not yet quit , quitted and the question of
the holy places was still the suject. of negotiation, and
of some anxiety, with those whoh gave their attention to
the question, and who were familiar with some of
its details. Very recently, however, it appears
that the question which at Constantinople absorbed
the interest of the representatives of the great powers,
and occupied the attention of the Porte, was altogether
of a different character—and that instead of its being a
limited and a mere local question connected with the
holy places at Jerusalem and the relations which those
subjects of the Porte who profess the Greek religion ne-
cessarily have with those places, it was announced with-
out any circumlocution that the Ambassador Extraordi-
nary of Russia had called upon the Porte to enter into
a convention which may be described—not to weary the
attention of the house with its details—which may be
fairly described—as a convention which, if carried into
• tecution, would transfer the allegiance of the vast ma-
jority of the subjects of the Porte in European Turkey
to the Emperor of Russia. (Hear, hear.) Well, sir,
when this became known, considerable alarm was un-
doubtedly created, and it has not, as yet, been in any
way allayed, and it was announced (I know not with
what authority), that her Majesty's Government then
felt that Colonel Rose, who had applied at a previous
period for the presence of a British force, was justified
in the course he recommended, and that we had sent
sons ships of war to Constantinople. I mention these
circumstances in order that I may place before the house
as clearly as I can, without presuming to give any opi-
nion at present as to what has transpired. The grounds
upon which I venture to ask for some explanation from
her Majesty's Government, and, having so stated the
circumstances, I will now put these two questions to the
noble lord. First, I wish to know whether the English
ambassador and the French ambassador at Constanti-
nople are at this moment acting in concert together, and,
if that be the case, then I would wish to know whether
there would be any difficulty on the part of her Majes-
ty's Government in communicating to the house the
general scope and tendency of the instructions which
they are so in concert together fulfilling. These are the
two questions which I feel it my duty to put to her Ma-
jesty's Government, and I await with some interest
their reply. (Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said—Sir, I will communicate to
the house as much information on the subject to which
the right hon. gentleman has referred as it is pos-
sible for me to communicate, without injury to
the public service. The right hon. gentleman has made
a statement which requires some correction, though not
material correction. Her Majesty's Ministers had
received information from the Government of
the Emperor of Russia, that the Emperor thought
it necessary to dispatch a special mission to Con-
stantinople in order to obtain a confirmation of those
concessions which had been made with the Greek Church
in reference to the holy places. He was informed
at the same time that the Emperor of the Russias had
occasion to complain that former concessions had not
been observed, and that he considered it necessary to
have some security that the present concession
would be duly observed. What was the nature
of the security required the Russian Govern-
ment did not state, nor what were the instructions
of the Russian ambassador. Certain circumstances, how-
ever, occurred which induced the Grand Vizier to
entertain some apprehension as to what might ultimately
be the result, and under these circumstances he applied
to Colonel Rose for advice, and that officer asked for
the presence of an English fleet in the Dardanelles.
Col. Rose did not communicate by telegraphic mes-
sage to Malta, but he sent a steamer to Malta
with dispatches, and with a request to the admiral,
after reading those dispatches, to consider the
grounds on which the Grand Vizier requested him to
proceed to the Dardanelles. Admiral Dundas forwarded
these dispatches through London, and said he should
wait the orders of the Government before he left Malta.
The Government entirely approved of the discretion of
Admiral Dundas. Colonel Rose himself was informed
—I think not more than two or three days afterwards—
by the Grand Vizier that there was no necessity for
the English fleet leaving Malta, and accordingly
a dispatch was again sent by a steamer to Malta, with
a request that Admiral Dundas would not prose-
cute his voyage to the neighbourhood of the Dardanelles.
I believe both that Admiral Dundas exercised a wise
discretion, and that Colonel Rose was perfectly justified
in that second order that he sent that the English fleet
should not leave Malta. The negotiations continued,
and Lord Stratford, whose ability and long experience
in Turkish affairs was well known, had been able mate-
rially to assist those negotiations, and to enable Prince
Menschikoff to obtain declarations and acts sufficient
in his estimation, and to which the French A mbaseador
offered no material objection. It was hoped in London
and other courts of Europe that a matter which
had unhappily been the occasion of difference,
and been the source of considerable disquietude to
the Turkish Government, would have been settled,
and that the nussion of Prince Menschiktiff would
have also terminated favourably, but it appeared
that the demands made by Prince Menschikoff, in
accordance with the instructions he received, were such
that, though in the opinion of Russia they were no more
than were necessaay in order to secure the fulfilment
of the concessions made by the Porte with regard to holy
places, they were, in the opinion of the Turkish
Government, as well as of her Majesty's ambassador
at Constantinople, and the ambassador of the
Emperor of the French, in a nature which could not
but be considered as dangerous to the independence of
the Porte, and as infringing in some degree those stipula-
tions which all the great powers of Europe agreed to in
1815. The last dispatches received from Lord Stratford
- were of the date of the 9th inst. Both the English and
French ambassador took the same view of the articles of the
convention which were proposed. In the present state
of the negotiations it would not be consistent with the
public service that the Government should produce the
instructions under which Lord Stratford was directed
to act. I can only say, that they may be generally
described as instructions leaving much to his discretion.
but pressing on him that it was the fixed policy
of the Government to maintain inviolate the faith
of treaties and to support the integrity and independence
of the Turkish government. (Loud cries of hear, hear.)
Perhaps I may be permitted to say, that though we
have received no later official information, I trust from
the appearances at the present moment that the Russian
Government will finally seek no other security for Tur-
key than is compatible with the full authority of the
Sultan, as Sovereign of Turkey, and with the mainte-
nance of the peace of Europe. (Cheers.)
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
In reply to a remark from Mr. C. BERKELEY,
Lord J. RUSSELL stated that Government intended to
follow the same course in regard to the Wednesday sittings
as in former years—that was, to put Government orders on
the paper when necessary, but not to bring them on until
the orders standing in the names of private members had
been gone through.
REGISTRATION OF ASSURANCE BILL.
Mr. BRIGHT stated that he had received a telegraphic
message from a deputation from a number of building so-
cieties of Manchester, now on its way to London, in refer-
ence to this bill. What they wished to know was, whether
if the bill were read a second time pro forma, and it was
sent to a select committee, they would be allowed to give
evidence before that committee as to the operation of the
measure upon such societies as those to which they belong—
that was societies which purchased small parcels of land,
and built houses upon them for their own members ?
Lord J. RUSSELL replied that the bill in question,
which had come down from the Lords, was founded on the
reports of several legal commissioners, who had instituted
very laborious inquiries into the whole subject. What he
proposed was that the bill should be read a second time to-
night, and that its clauses should be afterwards submitted
to a select committee ; after which, as the hon. gentleman
was aware, it must come back and pass through a general
committee of the whole house. He thought it would be
inconvenient, after the inquiries which had already been
gone into by persons in every way competent for the task,
that fresh evidence should be taken, but the petitions of
the parties to whom the hon. gentleman had alluded might
be referred to the select committee, by whom, no doubt,
they would receive full attention.
Mr. BRIGHT thought it quite possible that the legal
commission from whom this bill had emanated might not
be aware of the peculiar circumstances of these societies—
but he would communicate what the noble lord had stated
to the deputation, and they would probably adopt the
course the noble lord had suggested.
Mr. HADFIELD intimated that he had presented a
number of petitions from some hundred thousand persons
connected with building societies against the bill.
• MULLINGS believed that the commission referred
'at! no this into any evidence in reference to the ope-
thoughl
tai bill on members of building societies. He
at the exel measure
would increase the profits of solicitors
,proems henhoutig. those poor persons. If the measure was
d move its postponement.
Mr. mnstrinaLESIASTICAL COURTS.
port of the co cieliesed when the bill, founded on the re-
me this subject, would be brought
forward, and arhetherc"it would. be introduced in the Lords
or the Commons?
Lord J. RUSSELL bad
.sti.Aated, on
that the cemmission ap
het he late
a former occasion
had made up their minX:lissntoand,i general outline of bill, but not as to the details -
three or four months to complete thotseN":lol3lT-4.1.t: probably
THE METROPOLITAN p
Lord D. STUART complained that ea •
which he had moved, as to the number of the returns for
the Metropolitan and City police who hada„Olnbers of
fore the magistrates, and had been punished, lui.d-Imdlrn
produced.
Lord PALMERSTON said he would into
as soon as possible.
inquire
the the
matter, and lay the papers on table
IRISH NEWSPAPERS.
Mr. NE WDEGATE inqiiired of the Chancellor of the
'
Exchequer whether there was 25 per cent. difference in
ews apers a comared
the stamp duty
levied
ilrish
o, what reasons the was
n
with English papers,
for it. said that it ,
5 CO ti 9 4411 UM I The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHrEftiER
WM in fad the practice to glow 2- Po =cent, -

papers, and to charge id. instead of ld., and the reason
was that at the time of the imposition of the present stamp
duty an alteration was made with regard to a privilege
which the Irish newspapers had of returning unused
stamps, that privilege being withdrawn.
Mr. NEWDEGATE—Was the privilege which was
withdrawn enjoyed by Irish newspapers excldsively, or
was it also enjoyed by English papers?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I under-
stand it belonged exclusively to the Irish paper 4.
The motion for the adjournment to Monday was then
agreed to.

INCOME TAX BILL.

The house then went into committee on this bill.
On Clause 3,

Mr. NEWDEGATE was understood to inquire whether
the Chancellor of the Exchequer would object to allow occu-
piers of land to have their land valued by competent per-
sons appointed by the commissioners in case they thought
themselves overcharged.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had never
had this point stated to him by any one, and he was not
aware that the occupiers of land felt themselves aggrieved
in this respect. He would rather not give a positive an-
swer without inquiry, but he would consider the matter,
and give the hon. gentleman an answer.
Clause 4 was agreed to with amendments.
On clause 5,

Mr. BRIGHT said this clause was of a nature which, he
thought, the house would be generally of opinion was ob-
jectionable. It professed to tell the house and the public
many things which were not contained in it, which would
require that any man who had a chance of discovering
what it meant to be very laborious, but also to have a good
deal of practice in construing acts of Parliament. He (Mr.
Bright) was in favour of the income tax, and disagreed
with the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to its being abo-
lished in 1860. He should prefer its remaining so long as
there was a single indirect tax, and what he proposed was
proposed in good faith towards the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer and the Government, and he proposed it because
he knew what was the feeling now in his own neighbour-
hood; while if the local commissioners were appointed in
the manner he suggested there would be a feeling in favour
of the justice and impartiality of the commissioners which
was impossible under the present system. He did not wish
to move that the chairman report progress, for it was his
desire that this measure should pass speedily; but still he
thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to give an
assurance that if the bill was allowed to pass in its present
shape, he would undertake to give them a consolidated
bill at an early period, and also that he would fairly
consider the subject of the appointment of the local com-
missioners. By this bill there was practically no appeal
to special commissioners if a return was sent in to the
local commissioneas ; and there ought not to be any re-
striction on appeals to the special commisiioners. He
should not make any motion, but he felt it to be his duty
to appeal strongly and earnestly, but in no feeling of hos-
tility, to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to explain the
views he held, and to give a pledge that he would effect a
consolidation of the measure, and consider the question of
a better mode of appointments of the local commissioners.
He (Mr. Bright) had brought the subject forward, because
he was anxious to make this measure as little irritating to
the public, and as advantageous to the revenue, as possible.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
question the motives which had induced the bon. gentle-
man to bring forward this subject, but when he had made
his explanation, the hon. gentleman would see that his
critisisms were not well founded, though his object was
rational and open to consideration. The hon. gentleman
was in error if he supposed that this was a supplemental
bill, and that he was precluded from making amendments
on it. This clause revived certain old acts, subject to any
provisions the committee chose to introduce. So far from
the bill precluding the making of amendments, the bulk of
it consisted of amendments • and it was competent to any
one to propose other amendments. The hon. gentleman
said that he ought to introduce a consolidated bill, and to
change the machinery under which the tax is levied. The
question of consolidating the bill was to be considered in
two points of view. In the first place, it was for the con-
venience of members and persons out of the house that they
should have a clear comprehension of what was going to
be done ; and in the second place, there must be considered
the functions which the bill had to perform as a ways and
means act for the revenue of the year, and the time in
which it was necessary that it should be passed. With re-
gard to members of the house. it was for their convenience
that they should see the new enactments standing by them-
selves. If ho had introduced a bill with 250 old and 50
new clauses, what would have been the condition of
gentlemen who had to master it,and he would have been
told that he had brought in a bill with the whole law
instead of with the new enactments, and that they were
so mixed up with old matter that they did not know what
was to be done. The plan he had adopted was not only
his own opinion, but was founded on authority and
general practice. Besides this time precluded the intro-
duction of such a bill, if he were to get a bill the functions
of which were to raise a tax to be paid into the Exchequer
within a certain period. When the Government came into
office in January, they had to consider the principles of the
tax, and all its structure was to be examined. They had to
take time to do that, and they could not in justice to the
house have delayed the measure for two or three months
longer till a consolidated bill was drawn. They would not
then have called in the Solicitor to the Board of Inland
Revenue to begin to prepare such a bill. The hon. gen-
tleman might perhaps think that the Solicitor of Inland
Revenue could have drawn a consolidated bill in twenty-
four hours, butpractice and experience was against any such
notion. The hon. gentleman also said that the machinery
of the tax should be changed, and he (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) must say that his demand was a reasonable one ;
for there was much of the machinery which required con-
sideration, and which had been productive of discontent.
He believed, however, that some discontent was caused by
its not being generally known that there was a power of
referring assessments to special commissioners instead of
local commissioners. He admitted that it was open to the
hon. gentleman to urge that amendments should be made
with regard to the local commissioners ; but the hon.
gentleman was not aware of the difficulty and complexity
of the subject. The hon. gentleman said that lists should
be circulated among those who paid income tax last
year, and to allow those who had been assesssed to vote
for the appointment of commissioners. The were many
difficulties in such a plan. One was that neither the
commissioners, nor the State, nor any ono else knew
who had paid income tax in the last year. That might
be known in schedule B, but not in schedules C or D
Would the honourable gentleman then have commis-
sioners for each schedule, with separate offices, and double
and treble organisation and machinery. Another difficulty
was that it was a very serious matter to send round a list
to all who had paid income tax last year, as it would tend
to expose to every man's neighbours all particulars relating
to his payment of or exemption from the tax. The hon.
gentleman might say that no one had a right to object to
this publicity, but the principle on which the tax had
always been levied was the observance of secrecy. The
difficulty with regard to the new machinery was the same
as that which applied to the consolidation of the act ;
namely, that if you got the machinery could you go to
work and make assessments. If you dispensed with the
present boards there must be an interval before others
were appointed and the assessment made, and there would
be delay in the levying of the tax ; and as he (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) had promised that there should
be a sum of six millions in the exchequer before the sth of
April next, it was only on the supposition that he should
get the law so as to be able to go to work at once, and if
the hon. gentleman insisted on a new bill being introduced
he could not get the six millions by that time. Besides,
the sth July would pass before it came into operation, and
the dividends due then would pass without payment.
With regard to the consolidation of these various acts, he
admitted the desirability; but the difficulty was great,
and, though he would hold out the hope, he would make
no pledge.

kr. I.IRIGHT was satisfied that any person of ordinary
brains could effect a consolidation of these acts by 48 hours'
labour. With regard to the secresy necessary, it was well
known that at present there was little or no practical
secrecy, the returns made by persons under the income
tax constantly turning up in the most unexpected places ;
and he had not asked that every man's assessment should
be printed, but that there should be such lists as would
suffice for guidance as to voting purposes. The right hon.
gentleman was bound to attempt something in the way of
consolidation by next session. The opinion of the judges
had been given that this was not framed as an act of Par-
liament should be, and it was unquestionably unconstitu-
tional to tax men by acts which they could not com-
prehend.
Mr. HAMILTON had given much attention to this sub-
ject since the house had, in effect, decided on the extension
of the income tax to Ireland ; and he was sure that there
ought to be a special bill for Ireland, the use of words
which were not at all applicable to circumstances in Ire-
land being likely to occasion the greatest confusion and
difficulty. (Hear, hear.) He wished to know whether
landowners in Ireland would be able under this bill to de-
duct the interest on mortgages and lands generally ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER answered
in the affirmative. He could assure the hon. gentleman
that the Government had considered the difficulty care-
fully, and had come to a conclusion against a separate
system or bill for Ireland.

Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE expressed a strong objection
with respect to the loose and slovenly way in which this
bill had been drawn up, and pointed out confusions and
apparent contradictions in several of the clauses. It would
be the easiest thing in the world to frame a consolidated
act.

Sir F. KELLY pointed out that the bill, as it applied to
Ireland, assumed that there were assessed taxes and land
tax in Ireland ; and, therefore, that it was an absurdity.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER answered
that, if so, no harm could be done, since there were no
assessed taxes in Ireland.

Sir D. NORREYS, as an Irishman who would have to
pay the tax, would like to understand the bill.
Colonel DUNNE made a remark to the same effect.
Mr. BLACKETT, taking the English point of view
merely, but admitting the unfairness to Ireland, expressed
his astonishment that the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Glad-
stone) should have missed his opportunity to acquire the
vast popularity with the trading classes which would have
attended a simple effort to remedy the obnoxious ma-
chinery of this bill.
Mr. MICHELL expressed his belief that the clauses re-
lating to Ireland were the most intelligible part of the bill.
If they struck out Ireland altogether and applied the
clauses now relating to Ireland to England they would get
rid of the Commissioners of Stamps and Taxes altogether,
and the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have power to
appoint special commissioners, who would appoint the
local commissioners.

Mr. CAYLEY put the case of an owner of land who oc-
cupied it himself, but who said he had made no profit for
some years, and who submitted that he ought to be as-
sessed in his profit and not on the supposed value of the
land. Would sueh a case as that be provided for ?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that
a person in such a position would not on such a plea be ex-
cused his poor rates by his fellow parishioners, and he did
not see why he should be excused his tax to the state.
Sir J. PAKINGTON remarked that the 41st clause em-
powered persons who insured their lives to deduct 7d. in
the pound on the amount of their premium. His con-
struction of that clause was that it applied only to schedules
D and E.

_-- —.
aprfiheeaCbiHeAtoNaCllEtLheLsOcßhedofuleths.e EXCHEQUER said it was
Alr. I. BUTT protested against this mode of legislating
by implication. toli ctidel:sta Itn
understand whatimpossiblethey were
enn as thlfe
h clauseedid
he should move that the clause be postponed. (Hear.)
As that seemed to meet with the concuiTence of the house,
he moved that the clause be postponed.
hoTah
erneemitAeritaottßve thaaidt si,tclwausase bneotpocostmplOneteedn.t for any
Lord J. RUSSELL said the hon. gentleman could not
move the postponement of the clause. He could move that
it be negativd, but that would.
to
the whoe bill,
becalliio the purport of the Waiting wail re...act lau the

powers for levying the income tax, which expired on the
sth April. The Income Tax Act was very much consi-
dered in 1812, all the clauses were gone through, and it
was stated by Sir R. Peel at that time that he had taken
into consideration the provisions of Mr. Pitt's Income Tax
Act, and the Income Tax Act of 1803, as framed by Lord
Grenville and Lord Lansdowne. Now Lord Grenville and
Lord Lansdowne were not such bunglers as to make the
thing confused. Parliament had repeatedly considered
the question of the income tax ; and on these
varlet* occasions they had contented themselves with
re-enacting without much alteration the provisions of
the act of 1842. Taking the whole number of clauses in
the act of 1842, and re-enacting them with regard to Ire-
land did not seem a very cumbrous and unnecessary provi-
sion. (Hear, hear.) If there were special provisions re-
quired in the case of Ireland, let amendments be proposed
and considered, but that did not seem to him to affect the
general question, that the most convenient way of extend-
ing this tax to Ireland was to make the general provision,
and then to make any alteration which the necessities of
the case and the difference of the circumstances required.
Mr. MAGUIRE considered that if the bill were extended
to Ireland, Irish members ought to have every facility for
understanding what it was they were enacting, which they
had not at present.
Mr. KIRK was one of the Irish members who had
voted for extending this tax to Ireland, which he did under
the full conviction that it was intended to take off the
consolidated annuities and direct tar.:,tion from the Irish
tenant farmers. By the 13th clause t'ie tax would be levied
on the tenants, and, as he read it, they would be able to
deduct from the landlord only according to the rent they
paid, whereas they might have made improvements, and
be assessessed in the poor-law valuation at a higher sum.
He thought the tax ought to be levied on the landlord, and
he suggested that by means of the police they could
easily ascertain who were the landlords and agents of the
property.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER admitted
the importance of the question, but suggested that it
should be discussed when they arrived at the 13th clause.
Mr. LUCAS suggested rn mention of Ireland
should be withdraß from the biil, and that a new bill
should be brought :07 t' at coantry. Certainly he could
not consent to enac'r, at one step the whole 190 clauses of
the bill as regarded Ireland, and therefore he should move
that the present clause be omitted.
The committee thereupon divided—
For the clause
Against it

Majority 7O
On clause 7,
Colonel DUNNE asked whether the owners of property
in Ireland who were under the present law liable to the tax
if they resided in England would be taxed according to the
place of their residence, or according to the locality of their
property ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
if the incomes were derived from land in Ireland it
would of course be taxed in Ireland ; and with respect
to other descriptions of property, they would be assessed
according to residence. The effect of the would be
to restore simplicity to what was now somewhat com-
plicated.
In answer to Mr. HAMILTON,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that a
separate account would be kept of the Irish income tax.
The clause was then agreed to.
On clause 12,
Lord NAAS asked whether the right hon. gentleman
was prepared to lay before the committee any calculations
with respect to the probable amount that would accrue to
the Exchequer from the extension of the income tax to Ire-
land ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had fre-
quently stated with respect to the amount to be realised
from this tax, that every man was free to form his own
opinion, and there was a peculiar latitude in the case of
Ireland. Certainly, he had no means of information which
would enable him to arrive at such a conclusion as the
house might receive upon the authority of Government.
It was anticipated that the proceeds of the rate-in-aid
would be 421,0001. The law was passed, the tax was levied,
and when the accounts came to be finally adjusted it was
found that the sum of 420,0001. had been brought into the
Treasury. (Hear, hear.) He must confess that he thought
they would come as near the estimate they formed of the
income tax. (Cheers.) The right honourable gentleman
then announced that he would propose the 13th and 14th
clauses. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BALL recommended the postponement of all the
clauses relating to Ireland—namely, those up to the 25th.
(Oh, oh.) He had supported the introduction of the bill
because he really thought that, so far from adding to the
taxation of Ireland, it would be a remission of taxation.
Since then he had made a c-lculation of the effect of the
financial scheme, and he found that, though it would lead
to an increase in Irish taxation for the first three years,
it would be followed by a greater diminution. He calcu-
lated that the increase the first year would be, not half a
million as hon. me nbers had said, bit 37,800/. ; the second
year, 144,00/. ; and the third, 0,000/. ' • but the dimi-
nution in the remaining four years would le-Ae a balance
of 170,0001. in favour of Ireland, but as half
a yeat's tax world then be due, the result would
be a balance on neither siee. At the same time, however,
the effect would be ran-love burdens from the labouring
classes to the posr;essors o: property, and therefore he had
given the measure his cordial_ supper;;. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. MACARTNEY disputed the accuracy of the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer's statement respecting the rate in
aid. In point of fact the rate in aid was stopped from the
poor's rate.
After a short discussion the question was withdrawn,
and the clause agreed to.
Clauses 13 and 14 were postponed.

Clause 15,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
proposed an addition to this clause, giving an appeal to the
parties assessed.
Lord NAAS objected to the clause as giving the Inland
Revenue Commissioners the same powers as the Commis-
sioners of Poor-law.

Mr. SCULLY supported the clause.
Sir A. BROOKE suggested that if a new valuation was
found to be necessary, it should take place at the expense
of the Governinent.

Mr. CAIRNS observed that the clause as amended would
only give the appeal in the one case—that was where the
valuation was below the correct amount.

Mr. G. A. HAMILTON said, one great evil in Ireland
was the number of valuations. He thought it would be
better to adopt the poor law valuation, or the valuation of
the commissioners for the income tax, and omit the clause.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could not
concur in that suggestion, believing that the clause was
necessary for the protection of the revenue. With regard
to the repeal, it was reasonable to suppose that as regarded
the parties themselves, the present valuation was fair, but
it was necessary to give a power of appeal to the commis-
sioners, in order that the valuation should not be unduly
depressed. Where, however, in consequence of such ap•
peal a new valuation was made, an appeal was given also
to the parties.
Colonel DUNNE asked by whom the expense of the
re-valuation was to be borne ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that
that the object of the present clause was merely to fix the
principle ; a special provision would be afterwards intro-
duced to provide for the expense.
After a lengthened but desultory conversation, the
clause was agreed to as amended.
Clause 16 was also passed, with some amendments.
Clause 17 was postponed.
Clauses 18, 19,
Mr. MAGUIRE wanted to know on what principle trade
and professions were to be valued in Ireland?
The CHANCELLLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that
the same rules would apply in Ireland as existed in Eng-
land for valuing incomes under Schedule D. At the same
time he did not preclude himself from adopting any im-
provement or alteration which might be suggested, or which
the peculiar circumstances of Ireland might render neces-
sary, preserving, however, the same standard which the law
fixed as to the amount.
After some further desultory discussion on this subject,
which related to a clause that had already been passed,
Mr. I BUTT moved an amendment to the effect, that
persons assessed under schedule D should be assessed by
special commissioners.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that if
ho understood the amendment it involved the necessity of
appointing and distributing over Ireland a high class of
officers, with high pay, to perform duties which in England
were discharged by a different class of officers with lower
pay. The assessment was not made in England by special.
commissioners. In Ireland it was proposed to give an ap-
peal to the assistant barristers.
The amendment was withdrawn, and the clause agreed to.
Clauses 21, 22, 23, and 24 were agreed to.

On clause 25,
Mr. BROCKLESURST moved as amendments, in line
14, after the words " commissioners for," to insert the
words " general or." In line 21, to strike out the word
" so ;" and after the word " assessed," to insert the words
" and paid for the last year, or on the average of the last
three years, as such commissioners as aforesaid may de-
clde ;" and in line 32, afier the word "for," to insert the
words " general or."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
see the necessity for the amendment, and thought it was
extending the powers of local commissioners, whose au-
thority now caused dissatisfaction. It also altered the
assessment under Schedule D.
After further conversation, the amendment was with-
drawn, and the clause was agreed to.
On clause 26,
Mr. BUTT proposed amendments to exempt incomes
under 1501. from income tax, specially in reference to
cleigymen. This portion of the income tax would only
produce 100,0001. a year ; and such a sum was not worth
the unpopularity which would attend such an extension.
Why not give up this, and forego some of those remissions
of taxes on luxuries which would benefit the rich simply ?
The hon. and learned gentleman referred to the speech of
Sir J. Graham on Mr. Disraeli's budget in support of his
proposition.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER regretted
that the honourable and learned gentleman should attempt
to re-raise the whole question of the various claims of
different classes to exemption. With regard to clergy-
men, he did not see why they should be exempted, and
lie assuredly did not think it would be for their interest
to be exempted. If the honourable and learned gentleman
was moved by compassion, why (lid he not propose an
exemption in the case of life annuities, and in the case of
widows with small annuities ? This was the proper answer
to such a proposal ; for in attempting to make one invi-
dious distinction, the honourable and learned gentleman
provoked half-a-dozen more. With regard to the
general proposal, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
condemned it altogether. The hon. and learned gentleman
condemned this extension downwards of the income tax,
but he did not seem sensible that his argument went to
this extent, that it was inexpedient to tax any , persons ex-
cept those of easy incomes ; and whatever the dangers of
democracy," none of them could be regarded as greater
than the encouragement of a principle such as that. (Hear,
hear.) He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was satisfied
that the classes to whom the income tax was to be ex-
tended, and who were aware of the intentions of the house,
acquiesced in that policy, finding their account in the relief
they would gain by the remissions on necessities and in the
new policy involved in the duties on succession.
After a few words from Mr. SPOONER,
Mr. BUTT wished to set himself right. This amend-
ment was in no way connected with the other amendment.
When the right hon. gentleman charged him with seeking
to obstruct the income tax by proposing graduations be-
tween different classes of income, it was he himself, that
had done that by proposing that incomes between 1001. and
1501. should pay only sd. in the pound. His (Mr. Butt's)
amendment did not touch real property.
The Marquis of GRANBY said he supposed that his
object was identical with that of the hon. and learned gen-
tleman, and that they were both of them in favour of indi-
rect taxation, and that they were both of them desirous of
getting rid of the income tax. But he (the Marquis of
Granby) thought that the best mode of doing so was
to make all feel its inequality, its pressure, and its
il;ilintiQe• rim these grounds he felt higtelif bound

to voto against the amendment. Perhaps the com-
mittee would allow him to explain a former vote
that he gave. He voted in favour of the amendment
of the honourable member for Hertfordshire, because
he did not approve of the budget. The hon. member for
Montrose voted against it because he was in favour of the
budget.
Mr. KIRK made an appeal to the committee in favour
of the clorg,ymen of all persuasions, who he thought ought
not to bear this tax when their incomes did not ex-
ceed 1501.

The committee then divided—
For the amendment
Against it

. 49
. 205

Majority

On the gallery being re-opened,
Mr. BARROW was found addressing the committee.
He was understood to complain of some injustice towards
tenant farmers in the mode of assessing the income tax,
and urged that they should be assessed on the same princi-
ple as landlords and tradesmen.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said if he
understood the hon. gentleman's proposition aright, it was
one be could not accede to. The tenant had the same pri-
vilege as the landlord by means of the appeal that was
given him. It would not be fair, after taking his rent as
a standard, that he should be allowed to make deductions.

Mr. BARROW repeated his objection to the existing
mode of assessment, and said it would be impossible for a
farmer to prove the value of his stock at the beginning and
end of a year, as a tradesman could do.
After a few words from Mr. VANSITTART,
Mr. W. MICHELL moved an amendment in line eight
of the clause exempting the first hundred pounds of
income from duty, on all incomes below 5001. a-year.
The hon. gentleman created some amusement by dis-
cussing the proposals contained in the customs resolu-
tions, and ridiculed the idea of reducing the duties
on rose-water, cards, and cameos. Especially ho ob-
jected to the reduction of the duty on cocculus indicus.
If they encouraged the use of such a noxious drug
and drank pale ale, they might see Death on the pale
horse. (Loud laughter.) The lower classes were pressed
upon by the whole of the budget, all the remissions of
taxation were for the good of the wealthy, except the re-
duction of the tea duties. The soap remission, he thought,
would do very little good for the people.
Colonel DUNNE then moved that the chairman should
report progress.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER suggested
that they should first dispose of the clause.
The committee then divided—
For reporting progress
Against it l3O-99
Lord J. RUSSELL protested against these repeated
motions to roport progress and he was surprised that hon.
members persevered with 'them when they saw that they
were going against numbers and against reason. As there
was no prospect of getting on with the bill now, he would
agree to the motion that they do report progress.
Mr. SPOONER objected to the words " against reason,"
as there was no prospect of reaching to the end of the clause
to-night, and therefore it could not be against reason to re-
port progress.
The house then resumed, and the chairman reported pro-
gress, and obtained leave to sit again.