The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-22 00:00:00

August; 1547. These clauses had been recognised by
the highest lawyers of the day, and he trusted tile house
would not refuse to grant an immediate inquiry into the
subject.
Mr, FITZROY said he bad requested the hon. mem-
ber to postpone his motion in consequence of the absence
of his noble friend (Lord Palmerston) from indisposi-
tion. As the hon. member had not done so, he must
ask the house to support him in moving for the adjourn-
ment of the debate.
Mr. HUME said it was now nearly eighteen
years ago since he first endeavoured to bring the sub-
ject before the house, and though he had been promised
an inquiry by successive Governments none had ever
taken place. He should, however, on the present occa-
sion advise his hon. friend to postpone his question
at present. (Hear, hear.)
After a few observations from Mr. Labouchere, Col.
North, and Col. Dunne,
Mr. GRENFELL said be would be most happy to
accede to the adjournment, but he hoped that Govern-
ment would consent to its coming on on an early day.
The debate was then adjourned to Friday next.

CARLISLE CANONRIES.
Mr. FERGUSON moved for leave to bring in a bill
to appropriate the income of such one of the canonries
of the Cathedral Church of Carlisle as shall next fall
vacant, to the augmentation of certain ecclesiastical in-
cumbencies in that city.
Mr. T. CHAMBERS seconded the motion.
Mr. CARDWELL said it was not his intention to
oppose the introduction of the bill. He had only to say,
first, this was a local bill for putting Carlisle on a diffe-
rent footing from other cathedral cities, therefore if the
house were to sanction this bill it would be putting
Carlisle on a peculiar footing, and as the Capitular
Commission were about to present their report to the
house he hoped the house would at present suspend
their judgment on the question for the present.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
BANKRUPTCY (IRELAND).
Mr. CAIRNS moved for leave to bring in a bill to
amend and consolidate the law of bankruptcy in Ireland.
The motion having been seconded,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for IRELAND said
there could be no objection to the introduction of such a
bill, and he should be most happy to give every facility
in his power to it.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.

AGREEMENT STAMPS.
On the motion of Mr. JACKSON, a return was or-
dered of all the agreement stamps issued by the Stamp-
office in the years 1852 and 1853, distinguishing the
2s. 6d. stamps from the others, was ordered.

WAYS AND MEANS.
On bringing up the report on ways and means,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY rose to move au amendment,
as he had considerable doubt whether any case had been
made out for the imposition of an addition to the income
tax. The amendment he now proposed to bring before
the house was to move the omission in the reso►ution of
the words, "and that the whole amount of the said
additional duties shall be collected and paid with and
over and above the first moiety of the duties assessed or
charged by virtue of the said act, for the year aforesaid."
He urged that there was no apparent reason for this addi-
tion to the income tax shown by the right hon. gentleman
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) when he made his
financial statement to the house. It was quite clear
this claim would not have been made on the income
tax-payers if there had not been some extraordinary pres-
sure to reduce the balances in the Exchequer. It was im-
possible the house could agree to such an addition to the
income tax without kno ►ving exactly what is the state
of our financial resources. Last year the right hon.
gentleman determined to deal with the 34 per Cents.,
and he believed the right hon. gentleman had to pay
4,500,000/, out of the balances to meet the deficiency
caused by that measure. The object of the amendment
which he (Sir H. Willoughby) proposed was, that the
additional income tax should not be levied in the first
half-year, but collected half-yearly with the old tax. He
contended that no financial pressure could arise from
spreading it over the whole year. Reverting to the
additional tax, he insisted upon the injustice of levying
it in one lump upon clerks, farmers, and persons receiving
small incomes, and especially upon the long annuitants.
The motion was seconded by Mr. FRENCH, who com-
plained of the harshness with which Ireland had been
treated in reference to this tax.
Mr. HANKEY reviewed the financial policy of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer last year, and censured as
injudicious and erroneous his operations upon both the
funded and unfunded debt. The result of his conver-
sions, he contended, had been that, although he had
paid off a considerable amount of the national debt, it
had been done at a serious loss to the country, by means
of balances in the Bank of England, which would have
been otherwise applicable, without loss, to a reduction
of the debt ; and he denied the expediency of his borow-
ing money of the Bank of England on deficiency bills.
In conclusion, ho deprecated any tampering with the
currency, by increasing the issue of paper, in contraven-
tion of the policy of the act of 1844.
Mr W. WILLIAMS, in reply to Mr Hankey, justified
the Chancellor of the Exchequer for preferring the inte-
rests of the public to those of the Bank of England, and
considered that -his measures had been right, though
unexpected events had deranged the money-market.
Mr. SPOONER dissented entirely from Mr. Mulkey
with respect to the issue of paper, insisting that it would
be impossible to go on with the act of 1844 if the war
continued, which would require the raising of large
sums of money, while gold would be drained out of the
country, crippling to that extent our circulation. With
regard to the increased income tax, which he anticipated
would not be limited to a half-year, he protested against
the burdens of the war being thrown upon direct taxa-
tion.

Mr. HUME vindicated the Chancellor of the Exche•
quer from blame in his financial measures, which, through
unforeseen political changes, had turned out unfortunate.
He resisted the amendment, believing that the collection
of the additional tax within the first half-year was not a
matter of serious importance, and that, in the present
emergency, the arrangement proposed was the best.
Mr. WILKINSON, without reference to political
derangement, questioned the policy of the conversion
measure, which had cost the country 700,0001. or
800,0001.
Mr. CAYLEY pointed out what be regarded as the
probable mischievous effect of maintaining the restric-
tions of the act of 1844, upon our commercial transac-
tions, which must supply the fund out of which taxes
were to be paid. He could not support the amendment.
Mr. LA.ING hoped the Government would be very
cautious in touching the principle of the law of 1844,
which, in conjunction with the prudent action of the
B ink of England, had, on the whole, been sanctioned by
practical experience. The measure oilast session, though
abortive, was, in his opinion, founded upon sound prin-
ciples, and he hoped to see it repeated under more fa-
vourable circumstances. He supported the original re-
solution.
Mr. MALINS inveighed against the continuation
and augmentation of a tax for the service of the war,
which the Whig party had held up to the detestation of
the country. The resources for the war could not be
found in direct taxation ; and he agreed with Mr. Cay-
ley, that the mos. formidable enemy we should encounter
would be the Bank Charter Act of 1844, the -paralysing
effects of which he endeavoui ed to show were already
commencing. He suggested as an indispensable provi-
sion against a future commercial crisis, that the restric-
tions of that act should be removed, and if a drain of
gold beyond a certain amount take place, the Chancellor
of the Excnequer, the First Lord of the Treasury, and
the Bask of England should have a discretionary power
of doing that by law which was done without law in
1847.
Sir F. BARING, after observing that the subject of
the B ink Act should be separately discussed, and that,
with respect to the financial measures of the last session,
the house had not yet heard the explanations of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, avowed his opinion that,
in adding to the income-tax, the Chancellor had made
the best arrangement a Finance Minister could make
under the circumstances. At the same time, he by no
means meant that he should confine himself to one
source of taxation hereafter. He opposed the amend-
ment.
Sir F. KELLY described what he represented to he
the deplorable condition of our finances, the balances in
the Exchequer being, in January last, lower by
4,000,0001. than in the corresponding period of the last
and preceding years ; and, in tracing the cause of this
alarming deficiency, renewed his attack upon the com-
mutation scheme of the last session—inspired, he sup-
posed, by the demon of speculation—which had resulted
in a dead loss of 720,0001., and the obligation of paying
8,000,0001. in money, the Government having had
ample warning of the fatal course upon which they had
embarked. From a series of elaborate calculations, he
argued that the loss of the country might have reached
the portentous amount of 10,000,0001. He then pro-
ceeded to show how the consequences of these transac-
tions affected our finances, by impoverishing the Exche-
quer and compelling a recourse to borrowing.
Mr. GEACH defended the currency policy adopted in
1844, and supported the original resolution.
Mr. DISRAELI—Sir, there are two questions put be.
fore us to-night. One is the receipt of the important reso-
lution for the increase of the income tax ; the other is an
amendment of my hon. friend the member for Evesham as
to the operation and the mode of levying the amount that
the house is asked to sanction by that resolution. With
egard to the first motion—viz., whether we shall bring
increased taxation on the country, and whether that taxa-
tion should be occasioned by an increase of the income
tax, that appears to me to be a question which we cannot
decide without entering into the policy which has occa-
sioned such a request on the part of her Majesty's Ministers
(Hear.) But it appears to me, that on an occasion like
the present—if Ido not mistake the forms of the house—
we cannot very strictly, on the question started by my
hon. friend, and within the limits of that question, enter
upon that important subject. (Hear, hear.) And consi-
dering that, with the exception I believe of the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, and a solitary colleague, no member of
the Government is present—(hear, hear)—l think the
house will agree with me in thinking that this is not a
convenient opportunity to enter into a discussion of those
important events that must have occupied the attention of
every individual in this house, and which have led to the
extraordinary demands that have been laid upon it by the
Government. (Hear.) I must remind the house that
when this project was laid before us we were informed by
her Majesty's Government that we were virtually upon
the eve of war, and that the causes of that contingency
were to be explained by certain State papers which her
Majesty had graciously placed upon the table. It was
from the study of those documents that we were to feel
convinced that her Majesty had been well advised to in.
entcreaseal liithug, theerarmamVu armaments; and,
at voceand,poraexthpractsshed a d
onourabelteerumni:
a