The Sun.
London, England, 1854-05-27 00:00:00

no further interest to expedite the sale. But to the sailors
no advances were made—they lost, therefore, by the long
delays that occurred in payment, and very frequently the
failure of the agents was one consequence of the long delay
that occurred in settling the account ; and further provision i
was ntroeuced into this bill for the sale of all captured ships
by public auction. In this way all temptation to favour
private interests was removed ; and he believed it was an
understood fact that when ships were sold by the Admiralty
they brought more at a public auction than in any other
way. They provided, therefore, by this bill that a larger
sum should he distributed to the captors, that greater
security should bo obtained for its custody, and that less
delay should occur in its distribution; and still further
security was given to the captors in the provision that the
money should be paid not to the private bankers of the
agents, but into the public purse. He had reason to
believe, from the note he had already referred to as having
received from the navy agents, that they were under an
impression they were to be deprived of all remuneration
for their services. But that was an entire error on their
part. By the 2,1 of George IV_, chap. 20, section 29, 21
per cent. was allowed as commission to the navy agents
from all the officers and crew, while the captain was called
upon to pay 3 per cent. more, making 51 per cent. upon
his share. Now, this act was in no way affected by the
present bill. There was another act, the 53d George 111.,
chap. 93, which was also not affected. By this act the
captain and crew were enabled by a majority to appoint a
navy agent, which met the objections of those who signed
the petition that was presented to their lordships by Lord
Brougham, who seemed to apprehend that there was no
longer any power to appoint s navy agent. He might here
mention another alteration in this bill, that by the 33d
clause an appeal was given to the Judicial Committee of
Privy Council, instead of to commissioners of appeals, asin
the case of the last war. An objection was raised the other
night that this bill had a retrospective effect.
The Earl of HARDWICKE—That is in the other bill.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE was certainly not aware that
any such provision existed in this bill, but he was about
to say that even if it did it would only apply to one or two
cases. He would not detain their lordships longer, reserv-
ing himself, as he said, to answer any objections that might
be made.
The Earl of ELLENBORODCaI said that, important as
it certainly was to devise a good mode of keeping and
dividing the prizes when captured, he confessed that there
was in his mind a consideration more important still—to
whom these prizes ought to belong. With regard to the
navy agents, all he would say was that formerly they had
not only their commission of 21 per cent., but they de-
rived still further advantages from the keeping of the
money for so long a time in their own hands. As that ad-
vantage was now to be taken from them, while their
trouble was not to be lessened, he thought it was but just
and lair that their commission of 2!, per cent, should be
increased. With regard to the bill itself, he was sorry
that their lordships had dispensed with the discussion of
the bill on the stage of the second reading, for suggestions
might have been made which would have led her Ma-
jesty's Government to prepare amendments for the com-
mittee. That was now too late, and he was afraid the
bill would become an act of Parliament in a very imper-
fect state, and likely to inflict great injury ; for nothing
could be more injurious than that at the commencement
of a war Parliament should so legislate with respect to
prizes, as to run the risk of creating misunderstandings
and heartburnings between the two services. It must
be remembered that this—more especially in the Black
Sea, which was the great theatre of operations—would
be carried on by the army and navy in conjunction, and
therefore regulations ought to be framed to meet this
new state of things, But what was the state of the
case ? They had seen arrangements entered into as be-
tween the English and Frendh fleets—but then it only
the fleets ; and no mention was made of an ar-
rangement as between the armies and the fleets. It was
most strange, too, that although provision was made for a
division in the case of the co-operation of the allied fleets,
none was made for the co-operation of the allied armies,
or even for the co-operation of our own army. Suppose
the case of a combined operation of the allied fleets and
armies for the purpose of taking up a position in respect
to the port of Sebastopol, by which the Russian fleet were
either destroyed or compelled to go out to meet the block-
ading ships—could it be said that the army, which had
co-operated in this result, should have no share in the cap-
ture ? Yet no provision was made for giving prize to the
army. The next clause related to the capture by her Ma-
jesty's ships of a fortress—and so careful had the gentle-
man who drew the bill been, in order to be precise, that
he actually provided that it should be a " fortress upon
land." The whole property was to belong to the captors.
Here, again, there was no provision for the allied fleets,
for the allied army, or for our own army. The bill cer-
tainly contained a clause which provided for conjoint ope-
rations ; but that clause had reference only to our own
army, and not to the allied army. Indeed, in these respects,
he must say that he did not recollect to have ever seen a
bill of so important a character drawn so carelessly. He
must also draw attention to the provisions in the 6th clause.
It provided that the officers and crew of any of her Mae
jesty's ships who took any fortress upon land, or any ves-
sel in any river or creek belonging to or defended by such
fortress, should have prize. He wished these condi-
tions to be noticed. The river in which ships were
taken must be defended by a fortress, and the fortress
must be taken. No provision was made for the case where
the fortress was not taken, but 'a here the ship was cut out ;
and in order to make the ship a prize, she must be in a
river or creek belonging to or eiefended by a fortress. So
that the safest place for enemies ships to go into would be
an undefended river or creek, because there would be no
inducement for our seamen to follow them, except public
duty, inasmuch as they Would not be prizes except they
were taken in a river or creek belonging to or defended by
a fortress. The next clause, the 7th, supposed a conjoint
operation of her Majesty's army with the navy, not merely
against a fortress, but against a possession ; and here a
different rule applied. A different rule applied with re-
spect to prize to the fleet in A' large operation than when
the fleet acted, only against a fortress. All these were
matters of great importance, and he hoped her Majesty's
Government would take them into serious consideration.
The rule which had prevailed in the navy with respect to
prize was entirely different from that prevailing in the
army ; but he apprehended that no attempt would be made
to alter it as far as concerned the army. In the army, all
the forces participated in the pi ize whose position could be
understood to have contributed to the capture, however
distant they might be from the place where the capture was
effected. It was so held in the Deccan, in Scinde, in Spain,
and at Waterloo, and, in fact, it was the general law of
the army. 'With respect to the navy, it was much to
be regretted that no attempt had been made to rene
the rule clear, in order that suits might be avoidedd.r
To this end two points ought to be considered—
m
the matter of fact and the matter of opinion.
th Te
ter of fact was, whether the ship was seen,
the capture, by the captor, and by the vessel taken ; the
at tihe
me at-
of
matter of opinion was, she was seen under circumstances
which tended to intimidate the vessel taken and to encour-
age the captor. There was no security whatever in any
case, except where the ship was actually near, that the
question might not have to be submitted to a court of jus-
tice. Now it was most undesirable that brother officers
should thus be compelled, as it were, to resort to a court
of law with each other in order to settle their claims ; and
in order to avoid this evil some clear rule ought to be
established. Suppose the principle of distribution of prize
which prevailed in the army was established, and there
was a combined operation of the army and the navy to'get
possession of a place or fortress. If the place were cap-
tured by the army whilst the naval part of the force Were
not in sight of the fortress at the time of capture, that naval
force would not, under the provisions of the existing pro-
clamation, share with the military in the advantages de-
rived from the capture. Now it was most impolitic to
permit the existence of such a state of things. Again, i
a ship were taken, head money was allowed at the rate of
Si. a man. It was more difficult to takeea a
dm fortroney was -
lowed. Such were some of the omissions in the bill. Of
course, their lordships had not the power to supply them ;
but be hoped the Government would adopt the same rule
its both cases—that where a fortress was taken the rule
should be exactly the same as where a ship was taken.
But he must add that it was certainly a subject of
great doubt whether, in a war so peculiar as the present,
it was advisable to adhere strictly to the old naval prdin.
in In the c an
ciple in respect to the right of prize. .
the Black Sea the enemy's fleet was confined to port. The
port was blockaded by the lice-of-battle ships, which
blockade enabled all the smaller vessels, without any risk
or danger to themselves, to take prizes. The smaller ves-
sels then got the prizes ; but the mon serving in the line-
of-battle ships, blockading the punl ort s,ss the and who had
fleet
the
hardest work, would get nothing, e enemy's
should happen to venture out. In that case, in the event
of victory proving on our side, which he could not doubt,
they would obtain prize money. But the hardship of the
-
case was that the smaller vese6ls .could also share in the
prize, although they might hot assist in the battle. This
was an anomaly which ought to come under the conside-
ration of her Wasjesty's Government ; and ho suggested
that, considering,the peculiarity of the war, the strictness
of the rule ougho,6 be modified. The bill was a bill fore
"the more effe a 1 monins of her Majesty's navy ;" and
4
the object was to get men to man the large ehips. But it.
'Said to the men ~who wert kedr to man these ships,
elf none ; the prize yi
" Prize money you shall
shall all belong to-Nhe smalaell ships, because they alone
Will have the ;opportianity dolibaining it." In the last war
there was danger imiattempiin do take prize, here there
was none at all, for the smalle , essels took it, while the
y
line-of-battle ships did the rea teyork. Of this, howevsee,
he was sure, that a .combinedSperations of the army and,
4,
navy were coutem ted, it '#a most desirable that in
respect to all cornbi ed ops,iratens, there should be only '
one: rule—that the Alava' patik Should not feel that he
was fighting by the side Id the soldier, and exposed to
equal risk, without ,the chance e)f getting anything, while
the soldier was to share': in the prize. Such a state of
things was contrary, to equity, and it could not be allowed
to exist. In conclusion, 110 expressed his conviction that'
material alteration's-were required in the bill, ire Order tie:
give satisfaction; tle, the two services, and for theNuipeSe
of avoiding misunderstandiags., e. •
The Earl of HARDWICKE said A. was not going to
advocate the cauSa of the navy agentur the prize agents,
but the cause of the offieere of the navy, as he was ex-
tremely apprehensireethat, Under the system laid down by
the bill, prize-money wouidinoibe so carefully looked after
nor so quickly paid as unddr the old system. Under the
old system, prizes were dealt with eby, agents appointed,
under an act of Parliament, These agents were elected ter
the captain, officers,-and crew of each ship; and there was
the greatesS advantage to captors in having agents upon
whom they could rely in pi-Reding their interests. This
bill, however,,totally ignored and set aside this description
of persons, and banded the captured vessels over to the
Marshal of the Admiralty Court or the Queen's Proctor,
who had the power of dealing with the captOrs' interests
as they might think fit. He had been told of'a case which
had just occurred of a Baltic Arite having been cak-ried
into Hartlepool, where a sum Ofe 500/. was offered for the
ship. This offer was not aceepted, and the vessel. was
brought to London, by which, a diminution in the value
took place to the extent of -200/. Under the old
system, the agent would haie ascertained the. best
market, and have closed with the offer of 5001. Thus
a loss had been incurred by 46 captors from their not
having had an agent in this country. The noble duke said
it was a mistake to suppose that under the new system
prize agents would be deprived of the advantages which
they possessed. There was nothing, however, in the bill
to show that their remuneration would not be reduced;

and with regard to the argument of delay in dispensing the
proceeds of prizes in the last war, he contended that there
had been no other delay than was necessary by the state of
the law with regard to appeal. If there was delay it was
not for the advantage of the agent. It had also been said
that considerable sums had been lost to captors by the de-
fault of priza agents. He had no doubt that in the colonies
a description of gentlemen were employed as prize agents
during the war whose proceedings had caused loss to cap-
tures; but no such instance of ]osshad occurred during the
whole war in London or other parts of England where
agents were established. He denied, too, the statement,
that though advances were made to officers by these agents
none were made to the men. With respect to the Navy Pay
Bill, he objected to the 10th clause, which would have an
injurious effect upon the navy agents by its retrospective
operation. A great number of cases were already pending
in which they had done work, for which, if the bill passed
in its present shape, they could recover no renumeration.
The noble earl concluded by observing that if he was ever
called into active service afloat, which he did not expect,
he should infinitely prefer the old system of having an able
trustworthy, and wealthy man for his agent, than a Go-
vernment officer.
Lord COLCHESTER expressed general concurrence in
the remarks of his noble friend (the Earl of Ellenborough),
especially with regard to the distribution of prizes cap-
tured by joint operations. And he thought it would be
much more advantageous to the captors to have a confiden-
tial agent of their own, than a Government officer to look
after their interest.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE, in reply, said complaint
had been made that the navy agents would not have the
same amount of remuneration as they had formerly re-
ceived. But it should be remembered that they would not
have the amount of trouble which they had on former oc-
casions. As regarded a very large portion of the prizes, a
very great proportion was taken and condemned in the
colonies, and in such cases serious loss had been sometimes
sustained by the captors. The bill enacted that they should
be sold by public auction instead of private contract, which
would undoubtedly be a more advantageous arrangement,
and, combined with the appointment of a responsible pub-
lic officer, would entirely preclude the possibility of decep-
tion. For defraying small expenses incidental to the tran-
saction, the agent would be authorised to take out a power
of attorney.; aaulif he declinedto doso,thercthe °Seers of
the court would be required to settle all demands. With re-
gard to provision for insurance, the marshal was empowered
in all oases to effect it. In respect to conjoint operations
of the navy and army, it had not been thought expedient
to make provision for this case in the present measure. The
enactments of the bill were framed throughout both on
former practice and legal decisions. Great difficulties
would arise from any attempt to assimilate the regulations
of the navy to those of the army in reference to the assign-
ment of proportions of prize money, as suggested by his
noble friend opposite. Another suggestion made was,
that the payment of head money should be extended to
cases of capture of fortresses as well as ships ; but the
principle was one liable to abuse, and it would hardly be
safe to give it any greater extension than it now had. In
some such cases particular grants had been made by Parlia-
ment, which secured every object of pecuniary reward in a
sounder and more effective form. His noble friend was
quite in error in supposing that the bill would have any
retrospective effect ; it would come into operation on the
Ist of June, and be applicable to all prizes taken from and
after that date.
The bill then passed through committee, and was re-
ported with amendments.
NAVY PAY BILL.
This bill went through committee, and was reported
with amendments.
The Common Law Procedure Bill was reported.
The Church Building Acts Amendment Bill was read a
,hird time and passed.
The Dublin Port Bill was read a second time.
T heir lordships then adjourned at eleven o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS-(YESTERDAY.)

The SPEAKeuitook the chair at four o'clock.
The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Bac,enalstown and Wexford Railway (No. 2), Bideford
Roads, Cornwall Railway; Dudley, Halesown, and Brooms-
grove Roads ; Edinburgh Roads, Londonderry and Ennis-
killen Railway, London, Tilbury, and Southend Railway ;
Middlesex Industrial Schools, Stockport Rectory Division,
West Bromwich Improvement, &c. ; Winchester and
Petersfield Road.
The following bills were considered, and ordered to be
read a third time :—Dowlais Railway, Glasgow Suspension
Bridge, and South Devo
PEnTITIONS TaviAtock Railway.
Petitions were presented by Mr. CAYLEY, from 13,000
colliers of Cumberland and Durham, praying ,for in-
creased protection against accident in coal mines; by Mr.
Rica, from Richmond, against opening public houses on
Sundays ; by Mr. MoweuAv, from places in Devon, with
the same prayer; by Mr. A. PELLATT, from the Congrega-
tional Union of England and Wales, for opening the uni-
versities to all classes of her Majesty's subjects ; by Sir W.
CLAY, from places in Wales and Yorkshire, praying for
he abolition of church rates.
LOSS OF THE TIGER. _ _ _

Admiral WALCOT wished to ask the right hon. but.
the First Lord of the Admiralty if the Government had
received any information with respect to the reported loss
of the Tiger.
Sir J. GRAHAM could only state that her Majesty's
Government had received no communication with respect
to the alleged loss of the Tiger, exceptinc, that which had
come through the medium of the telegraph ; but such tele-
graphic communications had been received from various
parts of the Continent ; and although there was no direct
information upon the point, yet, from the concurrent tes-
timony which had then been received on the subject, left
no doubt that the fact stated was substantially correct.
THE SIMOO3I.
- -

Mr. MACARTNEY asked the First Lord of the Ad-
miralty if ho would lay before the house a return of all .
repairs made to the machinery of the Simoom subsequent
to her list return from Malta, during which voyage her
engines are believed to have repeatedly failed ; and to state
to the house whether the steam-power of that transport (in
all other respects most excellent) was reported serviceable
previous to the embarkation of the 79th, and, if so, by
whom? Whether any official or other report has reached
him of the progress of the Simoom steamship, so far as
Gibraltar, employed to convey the 79th Highlanders to
the East, to the effect that the engines of that vessel broko
down five times in four clays, first failing within a fow
hours of leavino. Portsmouth, before the ship reached the
Needles, so that for the last three days she relied altogether
on her sails, disconnecting
.her screw, and raking out her
fires. _ _

Sir J. GRAHAM said no dfficial information had reached
the Admiralty with respect to the Simoom, but of all the
transports, he knew for a fact that she was the most con-
venient and comfortable for the troops. At the same time,
he was bound to admit that her engines were not of the
best construction, but in the course of the last 18 months
she has performed a voyage to the Cape, to Canada, while
once or twice she had been out to he Mediterranean.
Under these circumstances, and in the pressure of the
' moment, it had been thought advisable to use her
again for the conveyance of troops, and intelligence
had been received that she“had safely arrived, with all
well, at Gibraltar.

GUN BOATS.
Mr. F. FITZGERALD wished to ask the First Lord o
the Admiralty whether it was true that her Majesty's
steam gun-boat Cuckoo, Lieutenant Murray commanding,
now fitting out for service in the Baltic, was proceeding to
her destination without any medical officer on board ; and
whether he was aware that, although application had been
made to the Admiralty for the appointment of a surgeon,
no reply had been given to that •tpplication.
Sir J. GRAHAM said it was quite true that such an
application had been made to the Admiralty, but it was
not intended that gunboats should be employed against the
enemy except in conjunction with larger vessels.
BLOCKADE OF RUSSIAN PORTS.
Mr. FIEADLA.M asked the First Lord of the Admiralty
whether an effective ..blockade is now in force as against
any of the Russian ports in the Baltic or Black Sea, or,
if not, whether any information can be given as to the in-
tentions of the Government on the subject.
Sir J. GRAHAM replied that both in the Baltic and
the Black Sea it was intended to institute a rigorous
blockade of the Russian coast ; and although no official
intelligence had been received of the feet,' he had reason' to
believe that a blockade of Riga already existed, and an
effective force was on the spot for carrying such blockade
into execution. With respect to the other ports in the
Baltic or the Black Sea, he had received no such certain
information ; but so soon as he should receive such infer-
mAiim, an official notification of the fact would bo given
in the Gazette.
Mr. M. GIBSON asked whether it was intended to com-
mence a vigorous blockade of tho Russian coast on the
White Sea ?
• Sir J. GRAHAM replied that it was not intended at
present to blockade the Russian ports of the White Sea.
COMMANDER IN CHIEF AT MADRAS.
Sir J. W. HOGG wished to ask the President of the
Board of Control, whether, upon the occasion of -the
vacancy in the office of commander iu chief at.
,Madras,
caused by the death of General Stanley, it is the intention
of her Majesty's Ministers to advise her Majesty to select
for that appointment an officer from.the army of the East
India Company.
Sir C. WOOD replied that tire subject had not yet been
brought under the attention of tfielGovernment.
CONVENTION BETWEEN THE FOUR POWERS.
Lord D. STUART asked Lord J. Russell whetheLhe
would lay upon the tablercopies of the convention or treaty
lately signed between Austria and Prussia ? Alsb,"whe-
ther any convention or protocol relating to. thel3resent
state of Europe had been ,lately signed between England,
France, Prussia, and Austria ; and if so, whether he would
;lay it upon the table, or state the generalynrport thetoof
to the house ?
Lord J. RUSSELL said a protocol had been'signed
Vienna between England, Frarce, Austria and PrusfAtili
the terms of which had not yet been received in this
country, but when they did arrive ho shotild take care
they should be laid upon the4able.
WAYS AND MEANS.
The house then went into committee on Ways and moatns,
Mx. NILSON rose to moire a resolution of yvkieh ho
hp.d. not given notice respecting the duty On spirits. in
Scotland., The gross old duty was 4s. 90. on spirits, andd.
the gross duty on malt and spirits was a net duty,of ss. Oi
but by the new duty it would be is. Bd., with a drawback
of is. 421.1. This was a stat4pf things considered not jus-
tifiable as between the Uotilt and the spirit distillers,
and it was agreed. -tha,f • the 112a.ck on malt
duty should bo -" eq4.lalged to t drawback_ on
spirits as it had been, under the old deti,.l: There was
no reason whatever .to believe that 'any. "increase had
taken place in Scotland in illicit ditsth illatith in pro-
portion to the :increaseded duty, alEligh ...the con-
sumption had greatly exceeded during the past year and
first quarter of .the present the consumption in previons
years. The bon. gentleman concluded by moving his re-
solution.
Col. DUNNE believed the proposed resolution as a
fiscal measure, was an unwise one.
Mr. HUME could not agree with the hon. member who
had just sat down ; so far from the measure being an
improper one, he thought Government would be justified
in raising the duty on spirits even much higher, in order
to put down illicit distillation.
Mx. C. DEUCE "greed with tho hon, member for Dion,

EXCISE DUTIES BILL,
when the various clauses were agreed to.
On the schedule being proposed,
Mr. J. D. FITZGERALD observed that, in the schedule
annexed to the bill, the increased duty on Irish sprits was
to conic into operation " on or after the Bth of May," the
day on which the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed
his resolutions. He moved the omission of the words
" on or."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER remarked
that if the committee intended to adhere to the uniform
principle by which an increase of excise duty, when it had
been proposed by the Government and accepted by the
house, had always taken effect at once, it was quite im-
possible to accede to the motion of the hon. member.
Mr. V. SCULLY said the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had entrenched himself behind a bad precedent, and he
hoped, therefore, that the right hon. gentleman would with-
draw his opposition to the proposed amendment.
The committee divided, when there voted—
For the amendment
1446
Against it 146
- - Majority against the amendment —lO6
The bill then passed through committee, and the house
resumed.
INCOME-TAX (No. 2) BILL.
The house having gone into committee upon this bill,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY asked the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer whether he had abandoned entirely the hope of re-
moving some of the glaring inequalities of this tax
a?tAned in
order that the committee might understand th
the inequalities to which he referred, he 7.uldntakier the
o
liberty of calling their attention to the operaA
upon one description of property, the Long inonnuif the tax
ties. The
Long Annuities would expire in 1860 ; it wase
very likely
that the war would last till then ; the incom tax was to
remain during the war, and it was important to iminture,
therefore, what was the burden which they were g
of May,
impose upon that class 42 . property. On the 10th f__
if a person invested 80/. in Long Annuities he would have
to pay income tax to the amount of it. 2s. 2d. ; but if he
invested the same sum in Three per Cent. Consols, he
would have to pay only 3s. 6d. The value of the tax on
the Long Annuities in 1860 would be 5h Bs. 6d. while on
the Cousols it would be only 16s 6d, The Chancellor
of the Exchequer might say that. the one was a tax
for a short period, and the other a tax for a
long period ; but the answer to that would be that
any person who had nothing but a Long Annuity to
live upon would, at the end of 1860, be in the workhouse if
he did not reinvest a certain portion of the capital, which
consequently would. become the subject of taxation. This
question was elaborately gone into before the committee
which sat upon the income tax, and a great deal of algebra
was produced to show that if the tax was perpetual it
would come to the same thing ; but that could not be satis-
factory to those who were not likely to live for ever, and a
practical injustice would be done to the holders of Long
Annuities. Nothing could be more easy than to remedy
that injustice. They might put the Long Annuities on
the same footing as the Three per Cent. Consols. He held
it was a breach of public faith, and contrary to law, to lay
hold of this species of property, and tax it at the rate of 15
per cent. instead of 6. He hoped, therefore, that the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer would give some assurance to the
committee that he would attempt to remedy this glaring
injustice, bearing in mind that funded property stood in a
peculiar position, having been created by an act of Parlia-
ment with a particular exemption from taxation, which was
not enjoyed by a.n. other class of property.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the hon.
baronet had raised one of the most important, intricate, and
difficult questions that had ever attracted the attention of
Parliament, and had raised it at a moment when about one-
tenth of the members of the house were present, and when
about one-tenth of those who were in the house were attend-
ing to the subject. (A laugh.) It was, he thought, quite im-
possible that there could be an occasion more unpropitious
to any clear or satisfactory solution of a problem which he,
for one, frankly owned could not be solved ; but whether
it could be solved or not, his answer to the hon. baronet
was this—it was a very grave and difficult question,
which, whenever it was considered, could not possibly or
justly be considered with reference to one class, but must
necessarily be considered with reference to all classes. The
case of the Lone. Annuitants differed from that of many
other classes who had, or suppose themselves to have, a
claim to exemption from the income tax, only because it
admitted of arithmetical calculation. The disadvantages
of the Long Annuitants were capable of being put in a
very distinct and palpable form by figures, and in that
respect they might be said to differ from those of other
classes ; but as regarded the substance of the case, the
Long Annuitant was not. differently circumstanced, except
in a favourable sense, from other persons having tempo-
rary incomes. The question was not between the Long
Annuitants and the rest of the community, it was between
those who had temporary interests and those who had per-
manent interests. (Hear, hear.) It might be said, why
not adjust the differences between temporary and perma-
nent interests? He had never promised to undertake that
task, and was glad that he had not done so, because the
promise was one which he would be totally linable to re-
deem. Those who thought that the differences could be
adjusted might reasonably give such a promise; but
nothing could be more irrational than to select one parti-
cular class of persons who had temporary interests, and to
give an allowance to those persons, leaving other classes,
who had also temporary interests, the full sweep and
stroke of the tax. (Hear, hear.) If they were determined
to deal with cases of hardship, injustice, and oppression,
he might suggest that the case of the Long Annui-
ties was not the strongest. A large portion of those annui-
ties were created in the midst of the war, when they were
subject by law, and were known to be so, to a 10 per cent.
income tax—(hear, hear)—and he knew a groat multitude ,
of cases which more deserved attention when they ap- I
preached the consideration of this question. He must con- :
fess, however, that he doubted whether, at this time of
day, they would do any justice by making any alteration.
They had now had the income tax in full play for the last
twelve years, and he thought he might safely say that
every bargain in Long Annuities which had been made
during that time had been made with the full expectation
that those Long Annuities would be subject to the payment
of the tax. He was therefore by no moans disposed to
think that, if they were to select a particular instance, it
would be wise to select this particular instance ; but that
which he wished to press upon the committee was this, that
they could not, without doing great injustice, attempt to
deal with an isolated case. It would be a piece of legisla-
tive favouritism, almost unexampled, to select an isolated
case of this kind, and to leave all the others which fell
under the same general principle, but in a more aggravated
form, untouched. On that account, while he admitted
that it was perfectly open to any gentleman to raise the
consideration of the whole question at any time, he thought
it was quite impossible that the committee could consider
it in a form so partial and exceptional as that which the
hon. baronet now proposed. (Rear, hear.)
Mr. HUME said, the right hon. gentleman had not fairly
met the arguments of the hon. baronet opposite. It was '.
not correct to say that the hon. baronet haal selected an
isolated case. The hon. baronet had distinctly stated that
he mentioned the case of the Long Annuitants as a sample
of many other cases of hardship and injustice which lie
might adduce in reference to the income tax. The truth
was that almost every class of the community was injured
by the tax in its present shape, and yet there was nut one
of its inequalities which might not be easily remedied.
Government had shrunk from the task; but, nevertheless,
something should be clone.
In reply to au observation by Colonel DUNNE upon the
objectionable mode of levying the tax in Ireland,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the act
of last year was, to a certain extent, experimental. It
was very difficult to anticipate how the income tax could
best be levied in that country. The Government decided
upon one mode, but at the same time were open to convic-
tion to snake any suggested alteration, provided the work-
-1 ing of it was unsatisfactory. They considered it expedient
in the autumn of last year to appoint two gentlemen as
special commissioners to hear appeals and receive com-
plaints, and.he had great satisfaction in being able to
istate that the levying of the income tax in Ireland,
which the - 'Government anticipated would be at-
tended with .very considerable obstacles and difficul-
ties, had 'beo-si„found, on thb whole, an easy financial
opetatian.*- ' (Heir, heart) A. 'though the honourable
and gallant gentleman wad iivainted with parties who
had experienced annoyance in the collection of the tax,
his experience must be isolated and contrary to general
rule ; because it was not to be supposed that parties suf-
fering under the tax would have made no complaint to
those whom Parliament had appointed to receive and re-
dress these grievances. Parliament had been most careful
to provide for appeals, not to the collectors, but to the
special commissioners, and now that the first half-year's
tax had been collected, which might fairly be expected
would be attended with the most difficulty, although the
special commissioners in Ireland had to discharge
n all th
ase
duties which were discharged by local com
well as special commissioners in England, yet so small was
the amount of labour that Govenament hatd not thought
they would be justified in continuing hose
in their places ; on the contrary,. as ono or thewtoligreeens eeincie:l
commissioners in England had died, o eof the Irish special
commissioners had been appointed to the vacancy ; sad
wthreference to the other, it would be necessary to con-
tinue a special. officer in Ireland. That experience was
most satisfactory to the GoVernment, and would be so con-
sidered by the house. (Hear, hear.) Ho begged to as-
sure the hon. and gallant gentleman that any particular
case of annoyance or inconvenience of which he would
favour the Government with the particulars would not
fail to be carefully examined, and the Government would
be most anxious to take the first opportunity to provide a
remedy. (Hear, hear.)
The clauses, with some verbal amendments, were agreed
to, and the bill was repOrted.
r• .
' THE CONSOLIWATED FUND (£8,000,000) BILL.
This bill, as amenalid, was reported.
. a
UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD BILL.
The house went into committee on the Oxford Univer-
sity Bill.
Sir J. PAKINGTON complained thattlaebill had been
brought on to-night without that sufficien Cliotice which
the house hisd reason to expect. The lasttime that Lord
John Russell was asked a question on the subject he stated
that he would give two or three days' notice previously to
asking the house to go into committee on the bill, but last
night, the noble lord fixed the committee for this evening.
Sir conversation ensued upon this point.
A r. NEWDEGATE complained that the house had been
taken by surprise, and adverted to the small number of
members present,,
laird J. RUSSELL disclaimed any intention to take the
house by surprise and, with reference to the scant attend-
ance, reminded the committee of Lord.Clarendon'e obser-
avation respecting the Commons in his time :—" There are
many members ;he love the church, but they love it not
BO well as their dinner."
On the 22a clause, which enacts that any member of con-
gregation may, upon the promulgation of any statute,
Council,
which in writing amendments to the Hebdomadal
which thcacouncil may adopt, alter, or reject,
Mr. HE IaTL EY objected to the restrict xi power conferred
by this clause. It was desirable that further powe.nsht
ted
should
by
be given to express opinion by successiy_e_amondmeii a s
The CHANCELLOR of the acatv vu u

Mr. WALPOLE thought the clause alts nether tuleleu.
It gave no powers to members of Coanvgre
ceogantigrtioegation
n whichpotwkeyer
did not now possess. This clause gave
of making amendments without discussion, while the 22d
clause gave it the power of discussing without making
amendments.
After some further discussion,
Mr. MOWBRAY proposed the introduction of words
which would render it imperative on the Hebdomadal
Council to consider the amendments submitted to them.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER assented to
the amendment, which was adopted by the committee,
and the clause agreed to as was also clause 2;1.
M. WALPOLE moved the omission of clause 22, on the
ground that it was unnecessary, the 18th clause haying
given Congregation power to regulate its own proceedings.
The 22d clause merely empowered the Congregation on the
occasion of the promulgation of any statute, to speak in the
English language, without the power of moving amend-
ments. Discussions of this nature, without any practical
object, might give the Congregation the character of a
debating society.
The CHANCELLOR. of the EXCHEQUER insisted en
the necessity of retaining the clause, and on a division it
was ordered to stand part of the bill, by a majority of 134
to 70.
Clause 23 was agreed to.
Mr. HEYWOOD moved that words be added to clause
24, giving Convocation " the right of conducting its pro-
ceedings in the English tongue."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
egQnUEstßivoepdpzdt
amendment, which, on a division, w
to 99.
On the question of agreeing to clause 25, which de-
clares that certain votes in use in the University shall be
illegal after the passing of the act,
Mr. BLACKETT declared that his wish had been to er
tend the principle of the clause to all the idle and profane
oaths by which members of college foundations bind them.
selves in general terms to obey the statutes of their col-
leges ; but, being informed by the chairman that this
course would be irregular, he was obliged to move the
omission of the clause in the first instance, with the view
of substituting for it a clause drawn in these words—" It
shall henceforward be unlawful to administer any oath on
admission to any office of emolument in the said University
or the colleges thereof."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. thought
the course, taken by the hon. gentleman was inconvenient
in point of form ; besides which, it might be doubted
whether the house would go tho length of prohibiting all
promissory oaths in the University.
Mr. BLACKETT, in deference to what appeared to be
the wish of the house, withdrew his amendment.
Clause 25, as amended, was thou agreed
and
t;he house i
The CHAIRMAN reported progress,
re-
sumed.
Mr. WALPOLE wished to know when the bill would
be further proceeded with ?
Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to say that the
Bribery Bills would be taken first on Monday : then would
follow some money bills, and next he proposed to proceed
with the Oxford University Bill. He hoped the house
would be able to go into committee on the latter bill at no
very late
Onmotion of the noble lord, the house, at its rising,
was orderedhouron
the
to be ajourned to Monday.
This bill was read a irdDS time(SCOT and pasLAseND) .BILL.
d.
VALUATION third
OF L
This bill went through committee.
The Sheriff and Sheriff.clerk of Chancery (Scotland) Bill
passed through committee.
Mr. WHITESJDE obtained leave to bring in a bill to
amend the mode of forming the juror's list in Ireland and
the jury system.
SUGAR DUTIES BILL.
Mr. WILSON brought up this bill, which was read a
first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Monday
next.
The house then adjourned at a quarter past 2 o'clock.