The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-10 00:00:00

SOUSE OF COMMONS-(YESTERDAY.)

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
,The following bills were read a third time and passed:
Adel Beck Reservoir, Madras Railway, and Belfast
Ballymena Railway.
14.1111 e following bills were read a third time :—Austra-
-14'4 Agricultural Company, Dundee Waterworks, Great
:rthern Railway (No. 1) ; Londonderry, Enniskillost,
Sligo Railway ; Lough Foyle and Lough Swilly
/.,nage and Reclamation ; and Lough Foyle and
41g, h Swilly Railway Bills.
followlng bills were read a second time :—Burton-
-1,74-Trent Improvement (No. 2), and Rochdale Im-
r4eraent (No. 2). •
ROYAL ASSENT.
th.13,,,te Usher of the Black Rod appeared to summons
1,0
',°llllnons to hear the Royal assent given to certain
roetphoertr house, a list of which will be found in
Bnl tdhB
OVERNMENT Lin: ASSURANCES.
PELLATT begged to ask the Chancellor of the
144,1;ee'Ver whether it is the intention of Government to
lrbelves, whether the tables of rates is completed, and
ottilie probable that such an arrangement will be car-
-44110 CRANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
.replied.
Idte clause would be inserted in the Income Tax to
141 °flet to the intention of Government, as explained by
'"114 thell he made his financial statement, viz., that per-
'', pi,7ing assured their lives, or the lives of their wives,
`%ie;cuased deferred annuities for themselves or their fled,i, would be allowed, under certain restrictions, to
rye tit fltra their taxableincome the amount paid by them
tie tits
wanutial premiums. Of course when the arrange-
eia ould come into effect would depend upon whether
°deptere, \I'M adopted by the committee ; but should.iti•e
Ile should then be prepared to show the d!tails y
"14k; heel,Pr)Pesed the arrangement should be carried ont.

COFFER AND CHICORY.
t 4 t rti
co HAMILTON
the excise
kre of h.
labelled according
c leery and coffee
ff e rendered the
l'egulation, but sold and paid for as 0
put the question because
inquirecwhetteher a mix-
e„'lder liable to penalties. He _
tati with chicory., was
- Was info
ed that coffee, adulterated khult(lialiu sornerineho-i„ae eoffeelbelled
sere.
order,
ttr such a way as to deceive the P
-rd-
"uCreohffaee and Chicory,"
th-
eofr. • .T. "WILSON replied that undertillTarheerlyacce!
iris and ,41 chi mixed might be Bold,.
penalties ,
out bei
t° Pecculd be
4 t° eertainc°rrYegula Mons. If the mixture was s°lil w! .
%lid if lig labelled, the vendors
howewrealniaybpleerson _
0_
the
gat,: labelled, he could not see
Ob;;;ved, Unless they were content to
quo/. in preference to the label.
NAVY.
MANNING THE take the word f
, stens had beer,f,taakeen,
to.,TT 4. PECHELL inquired what of committee
on
rhos atds. the publication of the report°
N.1.4"e0n Tuesday last
alluded tolad been
t the
eh th • CritAlIA.M said, the paper° ifey and, w'
m.
ile
tllleet of
manning the navy, which had been laidn
laid
N,le, c table of the houso on the 3d
01
in the hands of mewl,
1.,,,,: ',?if expediting their being laced
the Queen'a would Print
1144 2'4eY were now being printed y
itiao would,
the
1
ooped, be ready very
f the papers had
1)%„13,t4te, that it was his intention, after
in two bills
Nil' "Night in, to move for leave to bring shortly. 11° o_,,d
(led on them, (Hear.)
4,31 es
I tXCISE DITTIES ON SPIRITS BILL.
1,11 Inver to Captain JoNits,
R stated, that
he
„enANCELLOR of the EXCHE
t00,,,,,,,1'''5ed to go on with this bill
--,, of the resolution on the legacy duty.
Lord CHURCH RATES.
afterQtUheElionse had dis-
%% • .1. RUSSELL requested the hon. members
otions for
en
thlBtock and the Tower Hamlets, .who had motions
had pro-
feZl'etorßownethis safbject,.
hie„l...._ a pre erem.e
arrti:"feet the Progress of public business, consent WthoichthathteuCi4:l;t7wnmould,
hen the
Glove' delay until Thursday, the 26th inst.,
I,f:4,ll:tent would give their motions precedence.
0. to
in otrede:
kJ'. rlittraNtonE and Sir W. Clay were underste LI
Trlesee in the noble lord's proposal.
, EPIaTED BRIBERY OF IRISH MEMBERS.
Lull the MOtion that the Speaker leave the chair, and the
-"he resolve itself into Committee of Ways and Means,
ho 4 I , : . BALL said, I desire to put the question to the
ph,-'", which I took the liberty
able to her Majesty'a Government generally. I was no.
on Friday night last of
tied 3 to obtain au answer to the question I then put, but it
h..ertui t° limo of 8 0 important a natur involving the re-
trttability of so many gentlemen on the opposite side of
11°48e, that I think they will receive in kindness and
Wi,lit°llr this attempt on my part to give them an opportu-
-443. °I refuting the statement which has been made. The
, kentle
pieden' °I an the member for Westmeath (Mr. Megan)
reel the other ' ht that an accredited agent of the Whig
l Iv • night
rii inistr3, had gone to a number of Irish members
titoriza°;l°llt."---(hear)—and had stated to them that he was
it the iris d'rt behalf of the Whig and Peel parties to say,
%N. ""4" zakbers would assist them in turning out the
ofnLord Derby, that when they Were rein"

stated in power they would not impose a property tax on
Ireland. (Opposition cheers.) This seems to me a trans-
action so iniquitous in its character—(laughter and cheers)
—so directed against the principles of the British constitu-
tion, and so contrary to the practice of the house, that
some further notice ought to be taken of it. A member
who had given only 12s. a-week, for which ample work had
to be done, was held guilty of corruption ; and the hon.
member for Bridgenorth, who had 22 charges of bribery
through his agents brought against him, was exonerated
from them all, except one, which was a charge of having
through his agents paid a bill due on account of a former
election. Purity is expected in the system of election—
uprightness and integrity on the part of the electors ; and
the electors are justified, if there is so keen a serutny as
regarded the constituencies, in asking that the members
shall not be found guilty of taking anything in the shape
of a bribe, whether place, pension, or money. This case is
especially one of those gross cases with which hon. gentle-
men opposite would, I think, have been revolted. ("Hear,
hear," from the Opposition.) The earliest opportunity
should have been given to Ministers of repudiating, ex-
plaining, or denying the charge. I would, therefore, re-
spectfully ask the hon. member for Westmeath, whether
he will state that such an overture was made as he alleged
on Friday, and that such a promise was given as that no
income tax should be imposed on Ireland if the Whigs
received the loaves and fishes by the votes of certain mem-
bers of the Irish party. I hope I have not taken an unfair
advantage ; but there was an objection to the notice which
I tendered.
Captain MAGAN.— -I believe, Mr. Speaker, the hon.
member has no strict right to put this question to me
at all. The rules of the house are, I believe, that
the question should be put, by order of the house,
through you. In the second place, I think I am un-
fairly treated by the honourable gentleman ; for if he
had considered one moment he would at once have seen
that a question of this sort, involving such grave conside-
rations, ought to have been placed openly and fairly on the
paper. If it had been so I should have answered it. I can
assure the hon. gentleman that he is completely mistaken
in all the facts he has stated with respect to this matter.
Lord J. RUSSELL—After what the hon. gentleman has
stated, I think it right to say a few words in consequence
of an impression which appears to rest on the mind of the
hon. gentleman. He seems to think that some person was
authorised by the Whig party, when the late Government
was in power, to make some contract to the effect that they
would not try to impose an income tax on Inland if those
Irish members would vote against the late Government. I
have only to say that, according to my knowledge and be-
lief, there was no person authorised to make such a con-
tract, and no such contract was made with the Irish party.
Lord A.VANE—As the subject has been commented on
in the public prints, I must submit whether, in justice to
the Government, the hon. member for Westmeath should
not assign the grounds on which he made that statement,
and also name the accredited agents to whom reference was
mai*.

Captain MAGAN—I did hear there was an intention to
bring forward the question, but a notice should have been
put on the paper. None has been so, and therefore I should
have been placed in the awkward position of being called
on to give the names of gentlemen who might be absent, if
hon. members could have found me stupid enough to strike
a man behind his back.

Colonel DUNNE—I don't think the scene very creditable
to the house. As an Irish member, I have folt deeply the
observations made in various newspapers with respect to
the conduct of Irish members. If Irish members made
such a bargain, it would be nothing disorderly. If I were
going to support a Government, I should like to have some
knowledge of their intentions. The way in which the Irish
members have been spoken of is most shameful; there is no
libel so base that a man will not write it for pay. All the
Irish members are lumped together ; no exceptions are
made.

Mr. MALINS—I think the credit of the house is con-
cerned. I heard the hon. member for Westmeath state
that a party of Irish members sitting abovestairs had been
waited on by accredited agents of the Whig and Peelite
party, and had this proposal made to them :—" If you
vote to turn out the Government of Lord Derby we shall
engage to keep the income tax off Ireland." If that be a
correct statement it conveys a grave imputation on the
great party which is now the Government of this country.
(Hear.) Is it decent or proper that such imputations
should pass unnoticed ? There is not an hon. gentleman
who does not know who those accredited agents are. It is
due to all parties that the imputation should be verified or
repelled.
Lord J. RUSSELL—I stated, that to the best of my
knowledge and belief, no accredited agents of the Whig
party made such a proposal. I ask the hon. member who
has just sat down whether he believes me or does not be-
lieve me ? (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Does the hon.
gentleman mean that accredited agents of the Whig party
made such agreement or bargain ; or, if he does not mean
that, let him state who it is that he does mean ? (Hear.)
Mr. MALINS—The noble lord's statement is, that he
did not authorise such an offer. The question, however,
was, whether such accredited agents made it.
Mr. G. MOORE—We are unnecessarily beating about
the bush. I myself know nothing about the transaction,
and was in no way influenced by any declaration of the
kind. I shall go directly to the point by asking the hon.
member for Wells what he has to state on the subject.

Mr. HAYTER—I am extremely obliged to the hon gen-
tleman for bringing this question to an issue. I certainly
have some reason, to complain of the hon. member for Cam-
bridgeshire. I saw him as I entered the house. I asked
him if he was going to put any question on this matter.
He told me that he had submitted a notice, that there was
an informality, and therefore he was unable to ask the
question in the form and the terms in which he originally
designed to ask it. I begged him then to put the questicn
in a formal manner, so that I might be enabled to give
a plain answer to a plain question—(hear)—and, if the
hon. gentleman had had the courtesy to comply with that
request, much of that which has painfully passed in this
house would have been altogether spared. The hon. gen-
tleman, when I was not present, took occasion to refer to
that matter, and I trust the house will not for a moment
believe that I in the slightest degree shrink from giving
a positive answer. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for
the county of Wicklow also came this evening and said lie
was about to ask me the same question ; I told him I should
be obliged to him if ho would defer it till to-morrow, be-
cause then I should know what the distinct charge was,
which up to this moment I don't know. (A cry of "Oh !")
I told him also that I was desirous of communicating with
another hon. member before giving an answer to a charge
apparently involving some question relating to him. (A.
cry of "Oh !") No arrangement seems to have been made
between those two hon. gentlemen. I never yet had a
positive, distinct question, put to me. But I now under-
stand the hon. member for Cambridgeshire to say that
some person, alleging himself to be an agent of the party
now called the Whig party, some time during the financial
statement of the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, took
on himself to attend a body of Irish gentlemen, and state
that he was authorised to make this proposal—namely, that
if they gave their votes for the purpose of over throwing
the late Government, the Government likely to be founded
on its ruins should undertake not to impose an income-tax
on Ireland. I never was authorised by any person or any
body of perfons to make any such communication to any
person or any party. (Hear, hear.) I never did attend any
meeting of any kind in my life of the Irish gentlemen.
(Hear, hear.) I never stated to any person, at any time,
that I was authorised in any manner to state, that in the
event of the Government of Lord Derby being overthrown,
the Government to be substituted in its place would under-
take not to impose an income tax on Ireland. If the hon.
gentleman had put the question plainly before me, as he
ought to have done, I should have given him an answer
before. (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
Mr. BALL—I did put the question fairly and fully last
Friday.
Captain MAGAN—The mistake made is in taking for
granted that I mean the hon. member opposite. (Great
laughter.) The words were these :—I spoke in the plural
number. I don't think the hon. member is in the plural
number. (Laughter.) I spoke of gentlemen usually
called accredited agents. To use " accredited" was a
stretch of conscience. They were three private Irish
members of Parliament. (Name.) I will not name ; I
will put a notice on the paper, in order to give them an
opportunity of offering explanations. As regards the hon.
member for Cambridgeshire, lain not surprised at the sen-
sitiveness which that hon. gentleman has evinced, for
nothing can be more odious or detestable than that persons
having gained an object by making promises should after-
wards refuse to carry those promises out. (Hear, hear.)
When we look back and observe the way in which the late
Whig Administration was displaced by Lord Derby's Go-
vernment, on the strength of their promising to a particu-
lar party that they should have protection ; and that as
soon as that noble lord and his friends obtained power
those promises were abandoned, it was enough to make
men sensitive as to the conduct of men who have once
placed themselves under pledges. (Hear.)
Mr. G. MOORE—After what has just taken place, I
think it right to say that, having heard that the right hon.
member for Wells (Mr. Hayter) was the hou. member re-
ferred to in the course of this discussion, I thought it but
fair to appeal to that right hon. gentleman in order at once
to terminate the debate. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. KNOX had understood that three Irish members
had waited upon the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Hayter)
by way of deputation, and that they were authorised by
him to make the statement which had been made by the
hon. member for Cambridgeshire.
Mr. HAYTER—I wish the hon. gentleman who intro-
duced this subject had mentioned what has now just been
stated by the hon. member for Marlow, that I might have
answered it. I will answer it now, and say that no such
circumstance ever occurred. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. WORTLEY.—I think the House ought to feel
much obliged to the right hon. gentleman for the explana-
tion ho has given, and I do trust we have now done with
this unworthy matter. (Hear, hear.) I think every gen-
tleman who has a regard for the character of this House
can entertain but one opinion as to this story, which, as it
turns out, is utterly unfounded. (Hear, hear.) I hope the
question will now bo put an end to. (Hear.)
- Here the subject dropped.
DISFRANCHISEMENT OF PERSONS EMPLOYED
IN HER MAJESTY'S DOCKYARDS.

Sir F. BARING, seeing that his noble friend (Lord J.
ni.n a bill to
dockyardsdtomi rearlivtlyde
askte
evidencewhther
Russell) had a notice to move for leave to
disable persons employed in her Majesty's
gun wharfs and other civil establishments of th
and Ordnance from voting at elections of memb'eAr
in Parliament for certain boroughs, wished to
it was his Intention to make that motion before
taken by the dockyards committee was printed? The house
knew nothing of that evidence yet. He had reason to soule
pose that the measure to be proposed by the noble lord was--
actually founded upon the evidence given before that
com-
mittee. If so, then it would be impossible for the house
fairly to discuss the subject without referring to that evi-
dence. If he were to refer to newspaper evidence before
the oommittee made their report, he should be very properly
called to order. He considered it unfair that any steps
should be taken to disfranchise these persons until the evi-
dence bad been , produced ; and therefore he thought that
the motion of the noble lord ought to be adjourned till the
committee had made their report.
Lord J. RUSSELL begged, in the first place, to say, in
answer to his right hon. friend, that the bill he (Lord J.
Russell) intended to introduce was not all founded upon
the inquiry now going on before the dockyards committee.
With respect to postponing the motion, the only objection
he should have to it was, that it must necessarily protract
the business of the session. The boroughs which he in-
tended to include in the bill were Chatham and Rochester,
Gre(nwicb, Sandwich, Portsmouth, Devonport, Plymouth,
Harwich, and Pembroke. He would postpone moving the
introduction of the bill till Friday 60'111141st,
COMMISSIONERS OF SEWERS,
Mr. W. WILLIAMS wished to put a question to Lord
Palmerston. Numerous deputations had waited upon the
noble lord respecting the management of the Commissioners
of sewers. He wished to know whether it was the inten-

tion of the Government to appoint new commissioners to
carry out the plans which had been designed.
Lord PALMERSTON admitted that complaints had
been made of the management of the present Commis-
sioners of Sewers. Those complaints principally arose
from the circumstance of a want of drainage required by
the metropolis. That want was chiefly, if not entirely,
owing to the fact that the funds at the disposal of the
'commissioners were insufficient. Therefore, much that
ought, perhaps, to be done, was necessarily left undone.
The commissioners would do their best to make the
drains where most required, as far as the means at
their disposal would enable them to do it. The com-
mission would expire in the course of this year, and it
would therefore be necessary this session to introduce a
bill on the subject. It was not, however, intended to
make any new arrangement. What would be proposed
was that the present arrangement should be continued until
better grounds were afforded for bringing forward a new
system.
Lord GALWAY, on behalf of Lord A. VANE, asked
the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether there were
any returns, or other official documents, on which his
statement of the expected amounts to be derived from
the succession duty (as proposed) was formed ; and if
so, whether he would have any objection to state those
sources of information, and to lay any documents from
which they were derived on the table of the house?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
there were no documents whatever such as the noble lord
referred to in the possession of the Government.

THE BUDGET.
RESUMED DEBATE.

The house then went into Committee of Ways and
Means.

The first resolution as proposed by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer having been read,
Mr. PALMER moved the folloWing amendment :
" After the words for every 20s. of the annual value or
amount thereof,' to insert 'such annual value of any lards,
tenements, or hereditaments, being the net annual value
thereof, after due allowance made for repairs, insurance,
and management. "

He assured the committee that it was not his intention to
raise a new debate upon the general sabject of the income
tax, but to confine himself to making the few observations
that were necessary in support of his own proposition.
Considering that they were now called upon to sanction an
income tax for a much longer period than was ever pro-
posed before, it was necessary they should endeavour to
mitigate its inequalities. With respect to the permanency
of the tax, ho entertained considerable doubts whether
when the year 1860 arrived they would find it likely to
terminate. He must be a bold man who would venture to
prophecy that the tax would cease in 1860. It appeared to
him that in the budget there was one class to whom very
little relief was afforded--he alluded to the class in sche-
dule A. It was to that class that his amendment applied.
He thought his proposal was but an act of justice to the
persons included in schedule A ; and he assured the Chan.
caller of the Exchequer that he would not have proposed
it unless he believed that it was a proposition that could
be borne out in argument. He need not waste time in at-
tempting to prove that the nominal value of an estate or of
houses was any criterion of the income which the proprie-
tor received. Very considerable reductions must be made
from the gross receipts. It was the income of the indivi-
dual they ought to tax, and his proposal was, that in order
to arrive at that income they should deduct certain charges
such as repairs, insurance, and cost of management. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer had shown that real property
was now paying 9d. in the pound instead of 7d., a fact
which he had adduced as an argument why the taxpayers
under schedule D ought not to complain, but which was
also, an argument why the taxpayers under schedule A
should be considered in the manner now proposed. (Hear.)
Previously to this admission of the right hon. gentleman,
the landed interest had innocently supposed they were
under the operation of an act of Parliament requiring them
to pay 7d. in the pound and no more. (Hear, hear.) The
tradesman, under schedule D, was allowed a deduction of
income tax in respect of repairs of his premises occupied for
the purposes of his trade on an average of three years. If
the right hon. gentleman would make the same allowance
in favour of the landowner and land occupier, whose claim
to that allowance was precisely analogous in this respect
to that of the trader, he should be quite satisfied. (Hear,
hear.) He was not prepared with any clause to carry out
the principle for which he contended ; if the right hon.
gentleman would admit the principle, there was no man
more competent than he to carry it into effect. He did
not conceive there could be any difficulty as to the mode
of effecting it. There might be an objection on the ground
of practical inequalities to the allowance of a uniform
percentage of deduction, but he thought it would be quite
practicable—the Chancellor of the Exchequer having con-
sented to make an allowance to landowners and occupiers
under the heads which he had himself specified—to permit
all-such persons to go before the commissioners, claim such
deductions as they could fairly demand under those heads,
and have those claims allowed. (Hear, hear.) If it were
suggested that be had no precedent for this proposition, he
would refer to the Parochial Assessment Act as affording
a precedent perfectly in point ; under that act, the assess-
ment to the poor-rate was made on the net annual value
that the land or house assessed might be reasonably ex-
pected to let for, deducting the cost of repairs, of insurance,
and—an expression, certainly, of very wide and somewhat
vague import—of other expenses necessary to maintain the
property in a state to command a rent. The way, how-
ever, in which this provision was practically carried into
practice was, that there were two columns in every paro-
chial ratebook, the one exhibiting the gross, the other the
rateable value of each property to be assessed, and the rate
was made upon the rateable value so set forth. (Hear,
hear.) It appeared to him that precisely the same prin-
ciple might be carried into effect with regard to the assess-
ment of the income-tax under schedule A. In making
this proposition, he was actuated not so much by a desire
to relieve the larger landowners, though the largeness of a
man's property afforded no reason why he should be un-
fairly taxed—(hear, hear,)—as with a view to relieve the
small owners of land, and the owners of houses on a small
scale. lie had been informed that as to the latter class,
one-third of their rental was swallowed up by repairs,
insurance, bad debts.—
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER.—The de-
falcations of absconding tenants are allowed for.
3^Mr. PALMER was glad to hear that, but he hoped the
number of absconding tenants was li-nited. Still, there
was no doubt that the inevitable deductions from the gross
rental of those persons were very material, and ho trusted
the right hon. gentleman would take those deductions into
his favourable consideration. The noble lord opposite had
the other night, be believed, expressed an opinion that the
amendment which he (Mr. Palmer) had announced, and
which he was now submitting to the committee, was at
direct variance with the proposition of the late Chancellor
of the Exchequer, and had expressed thereupon his wonder
that such an amendment should proceed from any gentle-
man on that side of the house. He did not propose to
discuss the alleged direct variance—the right honourable
gentleman the late Chancellor of the Exchequer could, no
doubt, settle that point with the noble lord=but at the
same time he would beg the noble lord to bear in mind
that at the period to which he referred there was no such
thing in existence or in proposal as the legacy duty on land
new before the house, and which the Chancellor of the
Exchequer had brought forward as a kind of compensation
to schedule D. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman
would hardly contend that schedule A could, in fairness,
be called upon still to pay 9d. in the pound instead of 7d.,
having in addition the legacy duty imposed upon it by
way of a satisfaction to schedule A. He trusted the right
hon. gentleman would give his proposition a serious, and
favourable consideration. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. ALCOCK, though he had voted generally in favour
of the budget, was not prepared to say that be was quite
satisfied with the income tax portion of it. Not that he
complained of it, so far as it wont ; his objection was that
it did not go far enough. He had, before the Christmas
recess, given notice of a motion to extend the income tax,
at 7d. in the pound, to all incomes in Great Britain and
Ireland, wages—even the wages of the labouring classes—
being included. At present but lin6s of the population
of the country contributed to its taxation, that 65th man
paying on an average 13/. ; whereas, carry his principle
down to the labourer at 12s. a week, and 5,000,000 of per-
sons would contribute to the taxation beyond those who
now contributed, each of those 5,000,000 contributing,
as his data taught him, 30s. per annum on the average.
In other words, whereas of the 440,000,0001., which
were the estimated property of the country, 250,000,0001.
now escaped taxation, his proposal was to make those
250,000,000/, contribute their fair share. (Hear.) Effect
this object, and instead of the present income tax of
5,500,0001., you would realise 13,000,00 M, per annum, and
the 7,500,001. beyond the present amount would at once
enable the Chancellor of the Exchequer to repeal the en-
tire duty on malt and hops, to repeal the soap duties, to
reduce the tea duties as now proposed, and to reduce the
tobacco duty to ls. It was said sometimes that this would
be all very well if the money could be raised from the
labouring classes. He believed that there would be no
difficulty in this, because—first, it would be a just mea-
sure, and one to which he was convinced, therefore, they
would not object; and because, secondly, it would prove
of the greatest benefit to those classes, inasmuch as they
contributed at present an infinitely greater amount to the
revenue, in proportion to their incomes, than any other
class. To show by ono instance the amount to which they
would be benefitted by the measures which he proposed,
he would take the case of an ordinary labouring man, with
a wife and three or four children, receiving, say, 12s. a-
week. Supposing, then, such a person to consume. 101 b.
of tea in a year, he would save upon that article 12s. ;
upon soap he would save 4s. a-year ; on beer, supposing he
only expended 455. at present upon that beverage, he
would save 15s. ; and if he consumed 51b. of tobacco he
would save upon that lls., making altogether 21. 2s. saved.
His income tax, supposing him to be charged at the pre-
sent rate, would be 18s., and he would therefore have a
clear annual money gain of 1/. 45., in addition to getting
his articles infinitely purer and less adulterated than at
present. He certainly was astonished that the Chancellor
of the Exchequer had not taken this opportunity of re-
pealing the duties upon malt, hops, and tobacco. The
former the people never would carry until they made a
strong demand for it, but then they would ; and as to to-
bacco, it was notorious that the high duty occasioned it to
be the staple of the contraband trade of the country. It
was said that smoking was a dirty and unwholesome prac-
tice. Was i 0 Then why had they a smoking-room in
that house and in all their clubs? (A laugh.) With re-
spect to the question at issue, he was satisfied that the
general feeling of the people of this country was in favour
of the budget, and of no part of it so much as that which
the hon. member for Berkshire now sought to modify.
Mr. MILES thought that the budget of the Govern-
ment dealt hardly with the owners of real property. It
was' admitted by the right hon. gentleman opposite in
1849 that real property was burdened with local taxes to
the amount of 12,030,0001., not one farthing of which had
been taken off since then. The proposition of his hon.
friend the member for-Berkshire was a fair and moderate
prposyeppftthtmioaorftn., and he trusted that it would meet with the
mhh
counw Chancellornaogrlis ,tfh
ero
of3a:7oooe
property
oExchequer.3.4,oo3,oool. of
ofwere
real
possessed
property was su
iponf-
ripsuot
which gave an average
great wealth and large estates, but according to the Bathe-
and other burdens, andega7
this country was divided amougst 200,030 proprietors,
of only 170/, to each. They were
to assent to the
thought they were fairly eilitlitleel:l ts,
now to subjected to the I
-observed,
duty in addition to local
proposition
0 siticircumstances
f his h
hen.
dionasrkeptlyhe Chancellor
eosf,
Bof"poor rate an other charges on the
the Exchequer
eery(allpmSerooaCurs°p.neStat that the landed interest would wascon-
t friend.h
Captaina t
every
vh
land had considerably diminished • 1849, and there
voted e would 1 dth e tellp r
otvhoeemi
tinue to prosper. He came into the
malt° a diffgrowe between Mod and preeale_ociii2Peti to
between the arm-chair incomes and the working!boy heasn—d
incomes as they were called—but he was of a pliable -mind.
why he
hear, from
hfreoemgedthheisOmppioultaionnd.)