The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-06 00:00:00

to law, they were bound to ascertain whether there was or
was not any ground for that suspicion. (Hoar, hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT : I want to repeat my question. The
noble lord has merely; told us what everybody knows.
N0w,..1-Jelifit to ask the:noble lord this question: has he,
in hisiffice, or by directions through his office, has any
police 16agistrate or iblinniissioner given any special
directions that policeinen shall watch the house and pro-
ceedings of Kossuth in this metropolis. (Hear, hear.)
Lord4AVVIERSTON;,. I have given no special direc-
tions wi4t, regard to Kossuth, but it is the general duty of
the police;; if they have any suspicion about any person, as
they probably had in this case, to ascertain the facts upon
which a charge may be substantiated, or may be otherwise
disposed of. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. COBDEN th4rose to address some further ques-
tion to the Home Secrelarjr, but
The SPEAKER said that the noble lord the member
for Tiverton had already spoken twice, and was not en-
titled to speak again on this question.
The subjeCt then dropped for a few moments, and was
succeeded by a brief interlude about

Ml' MONEY.
Mr. FAG AN begNgedISTERS to ask the right hon. gentleman
the Secretary for Ireland whether a measure on the sub-
ject of ministers' mow. would be brought forward during
the present session, and; if so, whether it would be intro-
duced before or after Whitsuntide ?
Sir J. YOUNG replied that the question of ministers'
money was one which, had -occupied the attention of the
Government for a long time past. The draft of a bill had
been prepared, but ho did not wish to present it to the
house without making a preliminary statement. As soon
as he could get a day for the purpose he would introduce
the bill. -(Hear.)
Mr. MAGUIRE said that this question had been
pitched about from one Government to another, and he
should be 'glad to be informed whether it was really the
intention of the Government to bring in a measure on the
subject this session? _

Sir J. YOUNG could only reply by asking the hon.
member what ground Elie had for doubting his (Sir J.
Young's) word ?
The former subject was then resumed by
Mr. COBDEN—I suppose, sir, you are the authority
without appeal on all points of order, but if it be the rule
of the house that the Minister for the Home Department
can only be allowed to answer one question on such an oc-
casion and on such a subject as we have been discussing, I
think it would be well to consider whether it might not
lie well to relax it in order to promote the dispatch of busi-
ness. If, however, the noble lord, the Home Secretary,
cannot answer the question I wish to put, probably the
noble lord the member for London (Lord J. Russell) can.
I wish to impress upon. the house that we are not here
dealing with the ordinaty case of an ordinary person. We
are dealing with a man who was long engaged in main-
taining in his own country the legality of the constitution
of that country, and he was supported by the whole body,
not of the poorer classes merely, but of the whole of the
aristocracy. I say that when such a man comes to this
country, having held that distinguished post of honour,
his case is not that of an ordinary refugee, .but it is that of
a man placed under the smguarct or tars country, the in-
cidents of whose life are minutely watched by the world,
and will be as minutely recorded in the history of the
times—and as he is treated by us will honour or discredit
attach to us in reference to. him. (Hear, hear.) When I
first read of this matter, and when I first read the state-
ment in the Times, I ,tlioright it my duty to call on M.
Kossuth and ask him if there was any foundation for that
statement, and he gave me his word as a man of honour
that he had, no more concern with the transactions re-
ferred to by the writer in that paper than had the
Speaker of the House 'of Ctimmons. (Hear, hear.) It was
true, he said, he had recommended a foreign refugee (one
who had not done him much credit—(hear)—to Mr.
Hale for employment, but he had no connexion with
Mr. Hale, or with the manufacture carried on by him. He
was invited to call on Mr. Hale to go over his factory as I
might have been, and as I have been invited to go over Mr.
Colt's factory • and I might as well be charged with being
connected with Mr. Colt on that ground, as M. Kossuth
was charged with being connected with Mr. Hale. And
with regard to recommending a man for employment, M.
Kossuth has numerous unfortunate refugees constantly
calling upon him to aid them in obtaining employment,
and I am speaking within the mark when I say I have had
at least a dozen applications from M. Kossuth to assist his
countrymen in that way. This is the whole basis of the
charge. Some prying individual found that a Hungarian
was working at Mr. Hale's, and because M. Kossuth re-
commended him he connected that gentleman with the
rocket manufacture carried on by Mr. Hale. Now, I
think it would not have been below the dignity of the
Home Secretary, if he had given the opportunity to M.
Kossuth to clear himself. I do not think the ex-Governor
of Hungary is so far below the dignity of the Home Secre-
tary of England as to make such a course impossible. And
if the noble lord had done so, if instead of sending police-
men to watch M. Kossuth's house, and dog him about, he
had taken means to allow that gentleman to explain, and
if the noble lord had thus obtained, as he would have done,
M. Kossuth's word of honour, that he had no connection
with anything of the kind charged against him, that would
have been sufficient—for he apprehended M. Kossuth was
as much entitled to credence as any member of the Orleans
family visiting our Court. I make no distinctions, and as
regards M. Kossuth I think ho is as much entitled to re-
spect and honour as any member of the Orleans family,
who are habitually received at Windsor. (Hear.) I make
no complaint of the hospitality that is shown to the Or-
leans family ; but I say that it would be disgraceful to
any man in this country, and more especially to any mem-
ber of this house, if he did not vindicate the right to hospi-
tality of this country, on behalf of those who carry with
them the good-will of the mass of their own countrymen,
which is the case with M. Kossuth, and if any one is al-
lowed to dog the steps of illustrious refugees, and it is
found out, we are bound to visit it with our rebrobation,
and public opinion will do the same. I have seen M. Kos-
suth, and have advised with him. I told him—" You
live under the same law as I do, but if you ask me what
the law of England is, I cannot tell you, for at any mo-
ment some old law may be exhumed for a particular occa-
sion, as has been done now." I advised him to put him-
self under the advice of a shrewd lawyer, and I do not
believe ho will be caught violating the law of the country,
for which he has too much respect. The question I want
to put to the noble lord is, whether any communication
has been made to the magistrates, or the police authorities
with reference to any proceedings for watching the house
of M. Louis Kossuth. (Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL—Before I answer the question which
the hon. gentleman has put, I must advert to -the former
part of his speech, because it is of great importance that
we should have some notion as to what is the policy of this
country towards these and other refugees ; and I quite
agree with the hon. gentleman when he says that we ought
to apply the same rule to all refugees, and I care little
what may be their rank or station. It, may be a prince of
high lineage who maintains extreme doctrines with regard
to absolute monarchy, or it may be a person of humble
station who holds extreme notions with regard to republi-
can institutions ; I care not which it may be, the rule
ought to be the same. (Hear, hear.) Then what is that
rule? It is not so very obscure in its general principle.
It is founded in the first place on the law of England, and
in the second place it is founded on that law in relation to
the great international law which governs the intercourse
of nations. The law of England allows refugees, from
whatever cause they may have suffered, or by whatever
power they may have been proscribed, to come to this
country and live undisturbed. This is the general law,
and in accordance with that law many persons of various
ranks have of late years taken refuge here ; and that
honourable distinction of this country is not owing to any
minister of the present day, but it is the ancient law of
this country that any one can find refuge here, and I will
never depart from that law of just and equal hospitality.
But if on the one hand that is clearly the law, on the other
hand it can as little be doubted that refugees who receive
our hospitality, and who reside in safety under the shadow
of our laws, so long as they are in safety ought not to
abuse that hospitality by levying war against any other
country, whether it be a republic or a monarchy, which is
at peace with this country. It has been said, with respect,
to the individual in question, that M. Kossuth was a per-
son of illustrious rank, who was governor of Hungary, and
who had endeavoured to maintain the ancient constitution
of that country. I will not enter into any controversy on
that subject ; but I may say that there some who assert
that there are two opinions on that point. It is thought
by some persons that he fought on behalf of the cause of
Hungary, and that he did all that a patriot could to
maintain her ancient constitution. But there are others
who think that, from want of judgment and im-
prudence, he had damaged the character of the con-
stitution of that country, and brought her into collision
with Austria, and so was the author of the calamities
which had befallen her. There are those two opi-
nions entertained, and it is not for me to say which is
the right one. However M. Kossuth comes to this country
and receives our hospitality; he comes not like a person
who was unknown, but as one who came with a liberty
which he had obtained chiefly through the exertions of my
noble friend when Secretary for Foreign Affairs ; who,
speaking in the name of England, urged on Turkey to per-
severe in the hospitality which, to her honour, she had
afforded to those exiles, and oven offered the support of the
arms of this country to Turkey if she should be attacked
while performing the duties of hospitality ; and, finally, he
urged on Turkey not to continue the confinement of M.
Kossuth, but to allow him to come to this country. I say
then, if any one ought to be bound not only by the general
law of this country, which breathes such a spirit of hospi-
tality, but by peculiar ties of gratitude to the Govern-
ment, M. Kossuth is bound to obey the laws of this coun-
try, and not to do anything which may involve her in any
cause of quarrel with any nation. The hon. gentleman
says that M. Kossuth has scrupulously obeyed the laws
which he found to be in force, and has lived without giv-
ing any cause of offence to those who administer them.
The hon. gentleman is well acquainted with M. Kossuth,
and the fact may be as he has stated it. At the same time
I cannot wonder that suspicions should be aroused of a
contrary nature ; for we cannot but recollect that we have
seen in the newspaper to which the hon, gentleman has
referred a letter or proclamation addressed by M. Kossuth
to the subjects of a foreign sovereign, calling on them to
rise against that sovereign, and urging his soldiers to
.leave
their colours and engage in hostility of the most deadly
kind kind against that state, and that proclamation
lished in connection with the insurrection at 31ilan
no.
has been stated on behalf of M. Kossuth that he had
_et
in it. But it is certain that when he was at
authorised its publication, and that charges hadlc bueteanyanhiande
gave a paper of this kind to a person, thusef lA)oiu",ttiiniga."l
t
the duty of insurrection to the subjects
say that it was an imprudent and unjustifiable
act in him,
ono to be used for the purposeasvoo
while residing in a foreign country, tof giveins u
insurrection.
oern.to
Notany
fp.,sicao,sasitni Kossuth
that it is his purpose to makewa
only this, we have seen it lately
war OnvesdovbeyreMi
several Hungarians
hon.
gnairemianlisercofoni.
terms of amity with this country;
whose tyranny and whose rule lie proatemsitsm,,ahne(nl N.llllll.ooabadi:ei on
ththiss
Westthat NiVgiCihuLa sn
ienTi
y, statedtii
at
uceted with M. Kossuth were employed in the manufacture
of rockets for the purposes of war—l say that when all
these circumstances are put together, it is not to be won-
dered at that the police should suspect that he had some
time
estaintaekies,rtehpaotrttsh.oefeomrssoiof
circumstancesnmer..
intention of levying war against a foreign sovereign. With
regard to the question asked by the hon. gentleman N,
iolr knowledge, whether affecting M.
own
fohbi
Policenoble friend, f r
fnnrdioe,ma
tl
timethat
h et
Kossuth or any other person, which induce them to believe
that any crime is meditated. I do not think
friend has said
think it right for
l
tnhi ea
tt ot
hs se
rye moreo
etvih adne
nth() i
os forwheimh ayno
n indictment could be
founded against any person but m
always maintain, that while on the orn. eilhaalned. wßeuart
eltoshuauld]
to extend our hospitality to those. persons, on the other
hand. we are bound by our obligations to foreign states not
toth aatllwowhicphermsoynsrirgehstidhinogii.this country to bo guilty of
infriend the .member for Morpeth,
when he was Home Secret
against the law of this col rjr' declared to be a crime
against foreign states.in.ry—tliat is, the levying war
Wish to say a few words more

with regard to a statement which has been made, that al
these proceedings arose in consequence of communications
received from the Government of Austria. The nature of
the communications which have been made to us by the
Government of Austria I will state in general terms.
Nothing in the nature of a demand or specific requirement
has been made by the Government of Austria to the
Government of this country. On the contrary, the Go-
vernment of Austria has repeatedly stated that they asked
nothing, and wished it to be understood that no demand
was made by them ; but they have stated that they felt
aggrieved by proceedings which were carried on here,
but that it was for the government of England, on which
they placed perfect reliance, to take such measures as they
should think fit with regard to them. It was not unnatural,
when insurrection was going on, that they should represent
that their Government was disturbed, and liable to attacks
from various quarters, and that sometimes attempts at as-
sassination were made by men connected with persons who
are attempting to overthrow the Government of the coun-
try ; and we ow that many of those who are connected
wits those proceedings are in England. Ido not say that
those complaints are.justiiied, but it is the bounden duty
of the Government, while they say we will not change our
law, and we will allow all persons to.come to and remain
in this country undistarbed, to see that the laws of this
country, and our international relations are not violated.
(Hear, hear.)
Sir J. WALMSLEY said the noble lord was in error in
supposing that the letter or proclamation to which he had
alluded was written in this country. So far from its being
written in this country, it was written when M. Kossuth
was a prisoner, and before he had ever been in England.
The most serious hardship against M. Kossuth was the
employment of spies. That charge had not yet been an-
swered. (Hear hear.) It was a most grievous outrage
that the police should dog the steps of that illustrious exile,
and of all those who called upon him or inquired after him.
If he lightly understood the noble lord, he (Sir J. Walms-
ley) could assure him that this question would not rest
here. (Cheers.) If what was stated was true, that per-
sons were absolutely sent to the house of M. Kossuth to
assist in the removal of his goods that they might act as
spies about the premises, then it was clear that those per-
sons must have been employed by somebody—if not by the
noble lord at the head of the Home Department, then it
roust have been by the police. (Hear, hear.) A com-
mittee of inquiry ought to be instituted; and if no ono else
would do so, he would himself move for an inquiry. (Hear,
hear.)

THE BUDGET.—ADJOURNED DEBATE.
The house then went into committee of Ways and
Means.
The resolution for raising a supply by way of duties on
all property in the -United Kingdom being read,
Arr. LAWLESS rose to move, by way amendment, that
the words " Great Britain" be substituted for " United
Kingdom." If he were asked why he had not voted in the
minority the other night, he would reply that ho was not
only member forClonmel, but had an interest in the budget,
ash question for the kingdom at large, and regarded the
principle of it as a step in the right direction. The present
Chancellor of the Exchequer was the ‘first who had the
courage to leap over the park-wall of the privileged classes,
and place on their shoulders, in the shape of a legacy duty,
a fair share of the burdens which they had hitherto escaped.
Ho regarded the amendment of the hon. baronet as nothing
more than an attempt to keep up those fences and park-
walls, and to bring back the late Government to power,
and he had therefore voted against it, but that vote would
not prevent his resisting the extension of the income tax
to Ireland, and, whatever might be the result, he would
most certainly press his motion to a division. He desired
to prevent the late Government being restored to power for
many reasons. First; ho remembered that they had pro-
posed to extend the income tax to funded property and
salaries in Ireland, and he understood that they would not
have opposed the motion of which the hon. baronet (Sir
whatsoever
thatthe
eßx.tHenaslillgoafvethneettaiexe, twohaelln in
country. This motion would be a good test of their opinim:
pthroepyertwyere
in
power,
on the subject. They all knew that at the last election
every Liberal Irish member felt himself bound to do his
best to turn out the Government, which, by their inflam-
matory placards, had raised the disturbances at Stockport,
which were used as a war cry during the Irish elections.
("Hear" from the Opposition.) He trusted such scenes as
occurred at Six-mile-bridge, and elsewhere, in consequence,
would never be seen again. But if they were to form an
alliance with the members of that Government, after they
had done all they could to put them out of power, and pre-
vent their exciting agitation and religious discord in Ire-
land, the most simple peasant would be puzzled what to
think of his representatives, or to explain the conduct of
those who professed to be the leaders of public opinion in
Ireland. A very excellent and patriotic man, Mr. Henry
Grattan, was turned out of Meath last year because he had
voted for a coercion bill at a time when it was necessary.
The present member for Meath, his successor, was moving
heaven and earth at present to restore to power a Govern-
ment whose constant pastime had been to give Ireland
coercion bills, and who, when last in power, had threatened
the priests, who were really the best guardians of the
public peace. He had not voted for the amendment, be-
cause he was opposed to the object its movers had in view,
but it did not follow that he accepted the propositions of
the budget. On the contrary, there was evidence to show
that Ireland was in such a state of distress even now as to
be unable to bear her share of the income tax. He did
not wish to exempt any class able to meet taxation, nor
would he say but that in Ulster and parts of the south
they were able to pay taxes as well as in many parts of
England ; but he contended that the country was only in a
state of convalescence and not able to undergo such a heavy
Infliction so soon after the sufferings of the famine. It
was not generally known here how heavily Ireland was
taxed. By a return recently obtained by the hon. mem-
ber for the University of Dublin it appeared, on a view of
the comparative taxation of both countries, that the
amount spread over the whole of Ireland was 3s. 71d. in
pound, while in England it was only 2s. 41d. in the pound,
thus giving an excess of ls. 3d. on Irish over the aggregate
of Irish taxation. Even in England an income tax, when
brought to bear against small traders, was a most unad-
visable measure, and in resisting its application to Ireland
he had no object but to avert the tax from those in that
country who would be crushed by this addition to a bur-
den which they at present could hardly bear. The income
tax would not only very much retard progress in the small
boroughs of the south and west of Ireland, but would
accelerate greatly the emigration going on there, which
was taking from the country all the most useful artisans
and workmen. He did approve of the rest of the
budget, but not of the application of the income tax
to Ireland, and he would do his utmost, upon that
question, to ascertain correctly the sense of the House.
He hoped the time would come when Ireland would be
well able to bear her fair share of the national burdens,
but, as he believed that time had not yet arrived, ho begged
to move that the words " Great Britain" be introduced in
each line of the resolution before the committee, in place
of the words " United Kingdom."
Colonel DUNNE said, his hon. friend in not supporting
the amendment made the other night.by the hon. baronet
the member for Hertfordshire (Sir B. Lytton) seemed to
him to have missed the only feasible opportunity of attain-
ing the object he desired, and was attempting instead
to follow a course in which he must be aware he had
scarcely any hope of succeeding. (Hear, hear.) The proper
moment having been allowed to piss by, this was neither
the time nor the occasion for bringing forward such a mo-
tion, and he thought it of so futile a character that he
should have been inclined to walk out of the house, had he
not by so doing rendered himself liable to misconstruction
out of doors. He would vote in favour of any Ministry
that would impose a just taxation on Ireland ; but it must
be remembered that the same taxation was not always au
equal taxation as between England and his own country.
(Hear.) That was the position taken up by those Irish
members who had opposed the budget. He maintained
that the remission of the consolidated annuities was by no
means an equivalent for the imposition of the income tax.
It must be remembered that when additional taxation was
imposed on England it generally returned to that country
in some form, for the dockyards, arsenals, and Government
establishments were nearly all situated there ; but Ireland
had no such return,, and this was one of the things that
made the imposition of additional taxation upon her un-
just. If the hon. member succeeded in the motion he had
proposed no one would be more glad of his success than he
(Colonel Dunne) would be • but he repeated that he did not
think the hon. member had adopted the proper mode of
securing the object he aimed at. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. V. SCULLY wished to remark that the Irish mem-
bers who had voted for the budget on Monday night had
done so upon a balance of the measures proposed regard-
ing Ireland, and the hon. and gallant colonel who had just
sat down had apparently adopted the same course when he
recorded his vote for an income tax for Ireland upon Mr.
Blacken motion of the sth of March, 1849, before the
hon. and gallant colonel had ostensibly allied himself to
the party with whom ho now acted. (Colonel Dunne—"I

did not vote for that motion.") He (Mr. V. Scully) was
not for an income tax to Ireland if he could possibly avoid
it. But if he supported the Government !proposal it was
because it would be a relief to small farmers of the dis-
tressed districts which he represented. (Hear.) In March,
1852, he told his Constituents he would do all he could to
•get rid of the consolidated annuities. There were some,
favourable circumstances in the condition of Ireland. Ile
remembered the time when he only obtained lls. for. wool
, for which ho expected in a few weeks to realise 235. 6(1.
(Hear.) Beef and mutton, too, were fetching high prices
—far greater than could be expected if so large a portion
were not consumed in England. (Hear.) He thought that
a change in the incidence of taxation would benefit the
people of Ireland. If, however, this budget should pass,
he should always consider that every shilling of the famine
advances was repaid. The income tax for 7 years would
realise 480,0001. a year—that would be 3,000,000/. The
increase in the spirit duties would bring in 250,0001. which
at 20 'years' purchase, would be 4,000,000/. Then there
were the succession duties, which would realise 2,000,0001.
more, so that, in one way or another, the Govern-
ment'would realise 8,000,0001. or 10,000,0001. for the Eng-
lish Exchequer by the present budget. He would not run •
away to-night, but stay and give his vote on this proposi-
tion. (Cheers.) Ho might betoldof what the people of
Ireland would say if he voted against the proposition of
the hon. member (Mr. Lawless). He did not care one far-
thing what the people of Ireland might think for the mo-
ment. (Cheers and laughter.) Ile would look to what
they would think when they understood the question.
(Hear, hear.) Ho would look into -the question for them.
He would look to the interests of that great county
of
Cork, which produced the ablest men of Ireland. (Laugh-
ter.) He would not deny that ablethere*ieninreo they had
men in Ire-
land who might come to a contrary. o
not the means which he possessed- of) forminbutg an opinion
upon the spot. (Hoar, hear.) He was sent here as the
representative of his constituents • the
said it with great respect—his representatives.'ywere not—and he
Ho should like to see 100 of his teint
-farmers in London.
asking him to give an account of ‘his conduct in Parlia-
ment, in reference to the vote he was about to give. He
should have a very selfish account to render to them, if, to
absolve his personal property from i
them with theincome tax, he saddled
Payment of the consolidated annuities for 40
years. He should not, therefore, object to see an income
tax levied upon Ireland,an if it wore divested of its inquisi•
torial character, levied, for example, upon funds,
salaries; shares in public companies,t and landlords' rents,
with a due deduction fosrhaanrneuoifietshaenid i.enliairsi, which
should also bear 'their
recom-
mended that a deputation of the Iriill'aml-enabeers sc'lioulsee
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, .which they had done.;
and they had also seen Sir 3. Young. They were told that
the income tax would be introduced into Ireland, with
mitigatory circumstances, and with as little of an inquisi-
torial character as possible. A fanner, holding land at a
rent of between 2001. and 3001. a-year, would not he be-
lieved, be assessed at all, and those who paid rent exceed-
ing 300/. a-year and upwards wind(' bo assessed at one-
third instead of one-half their rent. The Irish members
had also urged that 270,0001., the amount of arrears of the
Consolidated annuities due from the distressed unions,
should be remitted. He trusted that the clergy of Ireland
would be leniently dealt with. (Oh !) The Protestant
clergy were heavily taxed to the poor-rates, anti,l theweline-
, comes of.the Roman Catholic and Presbyteri 4.5"
their eoCks that
) so grievously reduced by
they ought not to be ofealletdhteindoenpatrott4epor_t the state which
did not support them. (Oh 1) At '"fit they ought not to