The Sun.
London, England, 1853-04-25 00:00:00

THE MODERN GUNPOWDER PLOT.

In reply to M. T. DUNCOMBE,r
Lord PALMERSTON said he had been misinformed
with respect to the gunpowder found at Rotherhithe.
He stated on a fmner occasion that 500 lbs. of gun-
powder were found upon the premises, but it now ap-
peared that he was
SOUTH wron
SEA g in inakinSTOCg thK.at statement..
In reply to Sir F. KELLY,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said be
proposed to take the report on the South Sea Stock con-
version bill to-night. He should afterwards lay a new
clause upon the table which he should propose to intro-
duce into the bill, on the motion for the third resding of

the bill. The object of this clause he stated on Friday
last.

INDIAN TERRITORIES.
In reply to Mr. DISRAELI,
Lord J. RUSSELL said he would state to-morrow
when he should propose to make the Government
statement on the subject of Indian territories.
M. KOSSUTH.
On the motion for going into committee of Ways and
Means,
Lord D. STUART took the opportunity of again
drawing under the notice of the house the circumstances
relating to the recent discovery of arms and amunitions
of war in Rotherhithe. It had been stated in some of
the public journals that M. Kossuth was in some way
or other connected with this discovery, but he (Lord D.
Stuart) held in his hand a letter from that illustrious
man denying, in the most positive terms, that he had
anything whatever to do with this affair.
The motion was then agreed to, and the house went
into committee.

PROPERTY AND INCOME TAX.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
the following resolution :
"That it is the opinion of this committee that, towards
raising the supply granted to her Majesty, there shall be
raised annually, during the terms hereinafter limited, the
several rates and duties following (that is to say) :
For and in respect of the property in any lands, £. s.
tenements, or hereditaments, in the united
kingdom, and, for and in respect of every
annuity, pension, or stipend, payable by her
Majesty, or out of the public revenue of the
united kingdom ; and for and in respect of all
interest of money, annuities, dividends, and
shares of annuities, payable to any person or
persons, bodies politic or corporate, companies
or societies, whether corporate or not corpo-
rate ; and for and in respect of the annual
:profits or gains arising or accruing to any
person or persons whatever, resident in the
united kingdom, from any kind of property
whatever, whether situate in the united king-
dom or elsewhere, or from any annuities, al-
lowances, or stipends,
or from any profession,
trade, or vocation,
'whether the same shall be
respectively exercised in the united kingdom
or elsewhere ; and for and in respect of the
annual piofits or gains arising or accruing to
any person or persons not resident within the
united kingdom from any property whatever
in the united kingdom, or from any trade,
profession, or vocation exercised in the united
kingdom ; for every 20s. of the annual value
or amount thereof :--
For two years from April 5, 1853 ...
And for two years from April 5, 1855 ...
And for three years from April 5, 1857 ...
And that on April 5, 1860, except as the
collection of moneys then due, the said
rates and duties shall cease and deter-
mine.
And for and in respect of the occupation of
such lands, tenements or hereditaments (other
than a dwelling-house occupied by a tenant
distinct from a farm of lands), for every 20s.
of the annual value thereof, one moiety of
each of the said sums of 7d., 6d., and 5d.,
for the above-named times respectively."
Sir E. L. BULWER denounced the tax as now pro
posed to be enacted, as being both unjust and impolitic.
He granted that there was much in the Budget
worthy of advocating, but still it was perfectly
clear that it was not necessary to continue the income
tax in the shape now proposed. If the income tax was
to be continued it must be rendered less unjust in its
operation. As it was now proposed to be re-enacted,
rio distinction was drawn between -certain and pre

00
00
00

carious incomes, but independently of that omission,

was now seriouzly proposed to continue the tax for seven
years without any guarantee that it would be abolished
even at the expiration of that period. True, the right
hon. gentleman calculated that, at the end of 1859 or
1860, the national balance sheet would be in such a
flourishing state as to enable the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to abandon the income tax, but, at
the same time, the right honourable gentleman
forgot that in the meanwhile attacks might be made
upon his sources of revenue which would lead to the
utter annihilation of his anticipated surplus. The Go-
vernment proposed to abandon an extraordinary amount
of taxation in the hope that the law of reproduction
would help to make good the deficiency, but those who
argued in that strain forgot that many of the articles re-
lieved from this taxation were articles of luxury, which
were not likely to obtain an increased demand in con-
sumption from being thus relieved from paying duties to
the Excise or the Customs. He, however, objected to
the continuation of this tax for so long a period as seven
years, though he might be disposed to reinact it for a
limited time. The han& of Parliament ought not to be
tied up in that way, and he should certainly resist this
part of the budget. It was proposed also to extend the
tax to Ireland, but in referrinc, to this point of the finan-
cial scheme, he did not wish to discuss the expediency
of this proposal so much as to point out the im-
propriety of the terms upon which this tax
was to be fixed upon Ireland. The sister kingdom was
coolly told that if she would consent to pay a general
income tax for a period of seven years, a debt should be
foregone in_ her favour which had been contracted by
only a portion of her community. The consideration
was grossly disproportioned to the amount of obligation
to be imposed upon Ireland. But here, again, came
in the objection of inequality. Why should settled and
certain incomes be placed upon the same footing as pre-
carious incomes ? How could the man who had nothing
but industry for his capital and health for his security
be expected to contribute the same amount of income
tax as the millionaire, with certain, though un-
limited income derived from freehold estates, or
other equally sure resources. The one was required to
pay upon his income to-day, which might be gone to-
morrow, at the same rate as the man whose income could
not possibly be shaken or disturbed during a lifetime at
least. Such a law was very impolitic and unjust, and
he would, with the permission of the committee, con-
clude by moving an amendment to that effect. (Cheers.)
Ml. E. DENISON found fault with the hon. bart.
for not having given notice of his amendment ; but lay-
ing aside that objection, what did the hon. bart. really
want ? He (Mr. Denison) had listened most attentively
to his speech, but he had been at a loss to dis-
. .

cover what his real object was. The honoura-
ble baronet did not appear to oppose the con-

tinuance of the tax, he onfy" objected to its inequalities ;
but the honorable baronet omitted to tell the
committee what his notions of equality were. Did the
hon. baronet wish to adopt the equality recommended
by the actuaries ? because, if he did, he, for one, could
assure the hon. baronet that the tax, if based upon that
plan would assume an appearance of confiscation. The
hon. baronet wanted to make a distinction between
land and capital embarked in banks, breweries, &c., but
he was at a loss to recognise such a distinction. The
only distinction which he could recognise was that con-
veyed in the well-known couplet, which says—
" When houses and land are gone and spent,
Then learning is most excellent."
But as for making a distinction between the case
of an income tax he certainly thought it was quite
out of the question. For his part he highly approved
of the budget, and he believed the country must feel as
the house must have felt the other night—that a great
mind had been at work fot its benefit. The rare intelli-

gence and truthful honesty which the Bright Hon. the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had brought to bear upon
his subject would find their reward in the triumphant
success of the Budget, which was the one best calculated
to meet the wishes of the people, and promote the wel-
fare of the country. (Cheers.)
Mr. BOOKER rose, and was
(LEFT SPEAKING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.-(THIS DA Y.)

CUTBILL'S DIVORCE.

Their lordship's sat this afternoon at two o'clock, to
hear evidence in support of this bill. The peers present
were the Lord Chancellor, the Earl of Devon, Lord
Waldegrave, and Lord Strangford.
Mr. Ed. James appeared for the petitioner in support
of the bill ; Mr. Kerr appeared for the youngest child
of Mrs. Cutbill, born since her separation from her hus-
band.

Mr. JAMES briefly stated the case. He said the
petitioner, Mr. Cutbill, was the manager of the
Commercial Bank, 3, Moorgate-street, and was Mar=
tied to his wife in Ha. They lived happily
together until the year 1843, when the alleged adul-
tery took place. It appeared that, in the early part
of that year, a Mr. Higley, formerly of Demerara, and
now of Constantinople, was paying his addresses to Mr.
Cutbill's sister, and took advantage of the introduction
which this circumstance gave him to the family, to carry
on a course of conduct with Mrs. Cutbill, which ulti-
mately ended in the commission of acts of criminality,
on which the present bill was founded. It could be
proved that, in the months of February and
March of that year, on several occasions, when
Mr. Cutbill was absent from home, Mr. Higley
bad visited the house, and had remained alone with
Mrs. Cutbill until past eleven o'clock ; and on another
occasion, in consequence of suspicions which had been
aroused, Miss Cutbill, to whom Higley was then paying
his addresses, and another lady, having placed them-
selves opposite to the Bank, had watched Mrs. Cutbill
come out of the house, and being immediately joined by
Mr. Higley, who was waiting for her in the street, both
walked off in the direction of Moorfields. They were
followed and accosted, when Mrs. Cutbill appeared in a
great state of agitation, and endeavoured to make it
appear that it was an accidental meeting. This led to
an explanation, and subsequently Mrs. Cutbill admitted
to Mr. Imrie, the godfather to one of her children, that
on two occasions criminal intercourse had taken place
between herself and Higley. Proceedings were imme-
diately taken in Doctors' Commons, and a decree pro-
nounced in the August of the same year; but Mr. Cut-
bill's means at that time being limited, he had been
obliged to postpone the proceedings for a divorce a
vincylo matrimonii until the present time.
Mr. Wm. John Hellier proved the serving of the
usual notices and papers on Mrs. Cutbill, and also pro-
duced the register of marriage.
andM April,
4C3a,trhrsahtseaiwd
atshaltiviinngFienhrtuhaery,seravnidce Mofai‘rcihr,.
Cut! ill,
Commercial who atß a
nk,
ohneerevmeinsitiri evening ire occupied the upper part of the
More:rigate-street. She remembered
letter part of February of that
ress
saen.ndtCutbill,hr
out
Higley. Her mist.
ctaomtlei ehboumtcehweri'tsh. MS
hre.
was out half-an-hour, on her returning Mrs. Cut-
billrooigley was there with her
sent her bed. -
and had not gone
mistiess in the drr.win..y.
NvenTir,t,
ing.reeto bed. There
away wh en witness
witness
Mr.
was a sofa in the draw
came again on the following Monday,Mr. Higley
Cutbill was out, and remained till after
gone to bed, which was about 11 o'clock, Mrs.in eCssukildl.

and Higley were together in the drawing-room alone on
that occasion also. About a fortnight after, Mr. Cut-
bill being out of town on business, Mrs. Cutbill went out
in the evening, and Mr. Higley brought her home and
remained with her in the drawing-room about three•
quarters of an hour.

Cross-examined by Mr. Kerr—Mrs. Cutbill remained
at Mr. Cutbill's until the month of May.
Mrs. Bell, formerly Miss Cutbill, sister of the peti-
tioner, said that in the spring of 1843 Mr. Edward Hig-
ley tas paying his addresses to her. It was against her
brother's consent, and he would not consent to receive
Mr. Higley on terms of friendship at his home. Mr.
Higley met Mrs. Cutbill at the house of witness's
mother. On one occasion, being together at the
Bank, witness, turning sharp round, saw Mr.
Higley put his hand on Mrs. Cutbill's bosom. She
remonstrated both with Mrs. Cutbill and Mr. Higley.
On the evening of the 25th of March, 1843, in conse-
quence of suspicions which had. been excited, witness
and another lady went to Moorgate-street, and placed
themselves opposite to the bank. After waiting a short
time, they saw Mrs. Cutbill come out and walk up the
street, until met by Mr. Higley, who drew her arm into
his, and then they walked together towards Moorfields.
Witness followed and accosted them, when Mrs. Cutbill
seemed very-agitated, and tried to exculpate herself by
saying that it was a casual meeting.
Examined by Lord Chancellor—Witness did not tell
her brother of what had taken place, because Mrs. Cut-
bill begged her not to do so.

Martha Ann Cutbill, sister of the last witness, said,
that on the 25th of March, 1847, she remembered Mrs.
Cutbill coming to her house late in the evening ' • she
seemed very agitated, and said she had just met Mrs.
Bell, the last witness, who had behaved very strangely
to her. Shortly afterwards Mrs. Bell came home, and
then it all came out about Mrs. Bell meeting Mr.
Higley and Mrs. Cutbill together. Mrs. Cutbill begged
witness and her sister not to tell Mr. Cutbill, and they
promised not to do so. They told Mr. Imrie, who was
godfather to one of Mr. Cutbill's children, of what had
occurred.

Mr. Imrie stated that, in consequence of a communi-
cation which was made to him by the last witness, the
sister, he had a conversation with Mrs. Cutbill, who, to
his great surprise, confessed that, on two occasions,
criminal intercourse had taken place between herself and
Mr. Higley, in her own drawing-room, once when her
husband was out of town, and on another occasion when
she came home with Higley in a cab. Witness was quite
unprepared for any such statements ; he had no idea that
matters had gone so far.

Mrs. Cutbill, mother of the petitioner, deposed to
having heard Mrs. Cutbill and her son's wife express
great contrition after her separation from her husband.
Mrs. Lanless, formerly Mrs. Soyer, corroborated
Mrs. Bell's statement.

The following letter from Mrs. Cutbill to her husband,
written shortly after their separation, was then put

in :

" I most positively declare I have never sent any letter
to Providence row, or any others than I have acknowledged.
I cannot sufficiently express my thanks for your kindness
in sending the dressing-case. I do not deserve the extreme
kindness I have received from one I have so much injured,
but may God look down upon a penitent sinner,l and
grant me forgiveness for my dreadful sin in injuring you
so much. I have read with great pain the letter sent by
your mother this morning. I know the burning of your
brain, and the grief at your heart, ani the grief which a
wretched-hearted womam who you have treated with every
kindness, has caused you ; one who has lost all, even her
own esteem. That you are suffering dreadfully I know.
Ob, how sincerely I repent, you cannot imagine. May
God bless you and my children—they are not conscious
what a disgraced being they have to call mother. I repeat
in this letter I have nothing more to confess. Good-eye,
and God bless you, and grant forgiveness to one who
trembles to sign herself,

" Your wife,

"ELIZABETH."

Mr. Cutbill was then called, and stated that the rea-
son why these proceedings were not taken before the
present time was that he was not then in a position to
afford the cost of them, and he was consequently obliged
to limit the proceedings to move in the Ecclesiastical
Courts.

On the motion of the Lord Chancellor, the bill was
read a second time, and the evidenc, was ordered to be
printed.

SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE.

CUSTOM-HOUSE, APRIL 23.
ENTERED INWAP.DS.—The Galatea, from Guernsey ;
Prosperous, St. Michael's ; St. Maria, Emden ; Tom
Cringle, St. Übes ; Frederich Johanna, Groningen ; Idea,
Rotterdam ; Brunswick, Guernsey ' • Johannes, Ditzum ;
Frau Margaretha, Carolinensiel • Antina, Hambrrgh ;
Secundus, Alexandria ; Woodville, lionig,sburig ; George
and Elizabeth, Rouen ; Barham, Calcutta ; City of Bou-
logne, Boulogne ; Thornsey, Swendborg ; Star, Antwerp ;
Minerva, Hans ; Tarbet Castle. Escomlorera ; Christina
Johanna, Groningen ; Jenne Josephs, Dunkirk ; Jeune
Victor, do. ; Gezuster Ball, Groningen ; Seine, Boulogne ;
Ceres, Memel ; Sophia, North Sea ; Anna Henrietta, Ham-
burgh ; Hawk, Dunkirk ; Panther, Ostend ; Salvator,
Porsgrand ; Venice, Charente ; Juno, Wyck Hilkea ;
Johanna, Hamburgh ; Aurora, Sennesand. ; Apollo, Dram;
Flora, Sarpsborg ; Hoffnung, Hamburgh ; Claudine,
Struer ; Mette Catharine, • Copenhagen ; Marie Agnetha,
Cullenborg ;- Heabets Anker, Christiansund ; Laurin,
Emden.

ENTERED OUTWARDS FOR LOADING.—The Tiger, for
Hambro' ; Forfarshire, Madras ; City of Boulogne, Bou-
logne ; Imtra Giezen, Rotterdam ; Thornsung, Copen-
hagen ; English Rose, Bremen ; Victoria, Cape of Good
Hope, and Australia ; Ingram, Cadiz ; Ire, Stockholm ;
Agneta, Harburg ; Panther, Ostend. ; Ruby, Elsinore and
St. Petersburg ; Poblana, Bilboa and Santander ; Joseph
Freidlander, Rio Janeiro; Queen of Britain, Trinidad.
CLEARED OUTWARDS WITH CARGO.—The Equator, for
Algoa Bay ; James and Emma, Brussels ; Herman, Ham-
burg; August Adolphe, Dantzic; Attwood, Prince Ed-
ward's Island ; Bonne Marie, Nantes ; Eliza and Maria,
Oporto; Condor, Rotterdam; Ocean, Havre; Countess of
Lonsdale, Hamburg ; Thames, ditto ; Batavier, Rotter-
dam ; Earl of Auckland, ditto ; Albion, Boulogne ; Diana,
Amsterdam ; City of London, Dunkirk ; Lord John Rus-
sell, Harlingen ; Calabar, Adelaide ; Highland Lad, Mel-
bourne ; Ocean, Hamburg ; Antwerpen, Antwerp; Foyle,
Jersey and Guernsey ; Bullfinch, Elsinore.

VESSELS SPOKEN WITH.
The Tigris, from Calcutta for Liverpool, March 1, lat. 17
S., long. 4 W.
The Scotia, from Bombay to London, April 5, lat. 13 S.,
long 9 W.
The Meridian, from Ceylon for London, March 7, lat. 9
S. long. 12 W.
The Seringapatam, from Bombay for London, March 10,
_at. 5 S., long. 21 W.
The Fleet, from Liverpool for Melbourne, April 17, lat.
49 N., long. 7W. -
The Leon, from London for Madras, March 13, lat. 1 S.,
long. 20 W., with damage in her upper works.
The Nora, from London, April 4, lat. 35 S., long. 13 W.
The Clara Anna Maria, from Cardiff to Shanghae, March
16, lat 2 N., long. 21 W.
The Alliance, for Calcutta, March 7, lat. 18 S., long.
30 W.

The Baroness, from London for California, March 8, lat.
16 S., long. 31 W.
The Medora, from Plymouth for Port Philip, April 15,
lat. 46 N., long. 9 W.
The Elizabeth, from Cardiff for New York, April, 3,
lat. 44 N.. long. 41 W.
The Pallas, from Clyde for Quebec, April 15, lat. 55 N.,
long; 10 W.

SERIOUS COLLISION ON THE RIVER, AND Loss OF
PROPERTY.—Thursday afternoon, between 12 and 1
o'clock, a most serious collision took place on the river,
under the following circumstances :—lt appears that for
some weeks past a number of mechanics in the service
of the London Dock Company have been, at suitable
intervals, engaged in repairing the outer gates of the chief
entrance at Wapping. It was, therefore, necessary to
have the use of a patent diving bell, which was placed
on board a barge, and was generally made secure to the
Dock Company's moorings abreast the gates. By some
means yesterday the brig Tom Cringle came in violent
collision *ith the diving-bell barge, 'which soon filled and
went down with the whole of the costly apparatus. The
barge in several parts received extensive damage, but
fortunately the men were at dinner, or the loss of life
must have been very serious. The whole affair has to

be fully investipied before the magistrates at the
Thames Police Court ; but at present sufficient time has
not tianspired to enable the officers of the company to
make the necessary inquiry. The officers of the Thames
Police, under the direction of Inspector White, are also
making inquiries into the real cause of the accident.
EXTRAORDINARY CASE.—A remarkable case of dispute
and decision came before the Nottingham magistrates on
Tuesday last. It appeared that a man named Oxpring
was taking a walk accompanied by his (log, when a
young man of the name of Reuben Harrison accosted
him, and claimed his canine companion. High words
arose, and a policeman being near, fearful of worse con-
sequences, took possession of the animal, and advised
the men to appear at lhe police-office, and allow the dis-
pute to be settlel by the magiatratcs. This was agreed
to, and at the appointed time and place each of the
parties appeared, and produced witnesses. The magis-
trates, however, being unable to settle the matter by
their own judgment, they determined to leave it to the
decision of the clog. The men were seated apart from
each other in they justice room, and the dog was intro-
duced with alt due ceremony. After searching about
some time, and passing Harrison and his witness with
the most contemptuous indifference, the dog perceived
Oxpring, to whom he at once hastened, joyfully wagging
his tail, placing his feet on his knees, and attempting to
lick his face. The testimony of the dumb witness was
considered conclusive, and Oxpring was declared to be
the rightful owner. _ . .

CHEPSTOW TUBULAR BRIDGE.—This structure is at
length completed, and after havinglmdergone an exami-
nation by the Government Inspector of Railways has
been certified to be fit for traffic.

TRAFFIC RETURNS.-The traffic returns on railways
in the week ending April 16 amounted to 296,8141., and
for the corresponding week of last year to 275,501.,
showing an increase of 21,1641., or 7.68 per cent. The
gross receipts for the eight railways [having th eir ter-
mini in the metropolis amounted for the week ending
as above to 134,9011., and for the corresponding week
of last year to 127,2591:, showing an increase of 7,6421.,
or 6 per cent. The increase on the Eastern Counties
Railway amounted to 1,542/. ; on the Great Northern,
to 4,136/. ; on the Great Western, to 1,049/. ; and on
the London and North-Western, to 4,704/. ; total,
11,4311. But from this sum must be deducted 36/.,

the decrease on the London and Blackwall ; 1,503/.,
the decrease on the London, Brighton, and South Coast ;
1,329/. on 'the London and South-Western ; and 9211.
on the South-Eastern ; together, 3,789/. leaving the in-
crease as above, 7,642/, The receipts on the other
lines in the united kingdom amounted to 162.9131., and
for the corresponding period of 1852 to 148,3911., show-
ing an increase of 14,522/. in the receipts of these lines,
which, added to the increase on the metropolitan lines
of 7,6421., makes the total increase 21,1641. over the
corresponding week of 1852.