The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-28 00:00:00

been supported by several speakers was that of the abstract
injustice of extending the succession tax to real property.
(Hear, hear.) He held that it was utterly impossible for
the house to judge fairly of the effect of the measure as
regarded the landed interest unless they considered it in
connexion with all those financial measures which formed
part of the budget. He must ask their lordships to recol-
lect that after the late Government had acceded to office
they threw overboard their favourite scheme of the trans-
ference of the local rates to the consolidated fund ' • and
that, instead of getting rid of the income tax,`they actually
proposed to renew it in an aggravated form as regarded the
land. (Hear.) When the present Government came into
power, they found it necessary to review the whole financial
position of the country. It was requisite to determine, not
only whether the income tax should be permanent or not,
but whether some pledge should be given to Parliament as
to the relinquishment of the income tax if it should be in
the power of the Government at some future time. Let not
noble lords opposite flatter themselves that if they had car-
ried their scheme they could have evaded the question of the
legacy duty. The into Chancellor of the Exchequer, after
proposing an alterat'en o" the income tax, which acted
differentially as regarded land, and atter abandoning his
proposition with regard to local rates, wound up his state-
ment by saying that the existing legacy duties constituted
a mass of injustice which could not long remain unre-
formed. (Hear, hear.) After proposing a differential in-
come tax as e'gainst land—
The Earl of DERBY—The proposition was not that
there should be a differential duty as against land, but
that a difference should be made between permanent and
precarious incomes.
The Duke of ARGYLL—WeII, then, there was to be a
differential duty as against realised property, of which land
formed a great
part. If any change had taken place in the
legacy duties, it would evidently h
The have been a change in the
was pthreelp. oesaealt.roef
key
-stone
thedirection now proposed.
Go-
vernment on that subject
which all the other propositionsiccYl—us4
whole arch of their financial
rowtaLs tHhaet
had
duenod
hesitation in saying that the differential income tale as
have exceeded inwaasmtount the proposed
against land would
have
beeonbae remembered
motion,d dwehda. a
there
imposition of legacy duty, and it
that this legacy duty might then
Their lordships then divided for the
appeared—

Contents—Present
Proxies
Non•Contents—Present 73
Proxies 66-139

Majority against the motion l3
The other orders were disposed of, and the house ad-
ourned at a quarter to eleven.

HOUSE OF COMMONS--(YESTERDAY.)
The Speaker took the chair at four o'clock.
DURHAM ELECTION.

On the question that the members chosen to serve on
the Durham Election Committee be called to the table
to be sworn, _ _

Mr. T. EGERTON moved that the committee
be discharged and the petition referred again
to the General Committee of Elections, on the
ground that one of the members selected to serve
on the Durham committee, viz., the hon. member
for Dundee, was now sitting on a committee on certain
private bills.
The SPEAKER suggested that the motion should be
made in the terms prescribed by the petition, viz., that
the hon. member for Dundee be alone discharged, and
then, as a matter of course, the committee would be re-
ferred back to the general committee of elections.
Mr. T. EGERTON said he had no objection to
amend the motion accordingly.
Sir J. TROLLOPE had no wish to oppose the motion,
but he must protest against it being treated as a pre-
cedent.

Mr. ELLICE announced that other motions of this
nature would have to be made hereafter.
After a short conversation,
Mr. DUNCAN said that the motion had been made
out of no personal regard for himself, but solely for the
sake of promoting the business of another committee
upon which he had been sitting for some considerable
time. He was quite ready to abide by the decision of
the house, but he wished it to be distinctly understood
that he had no desire whatever to shirk his duties.
The motion was then agreed to.
CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS.

The members selected to serve on the Clare, Liver-
pool, Sligo, and Peterborough Election Committees were
called to the table and sworn. The committees to meet
for the first time to-morrow.
BURY ST. EDMUNDS.

On the members selected to serve on this committee
being called over,
Mr. STRUTT moved that the attendance of the hon.
member for Tewkesbury on the committee be dispensed
with on the ground that the hon. member was already
serving on a committee where his attendance could not
be dispensed with.
The motion was agreed to.
BLACKBURN ELECTION.

The SPEAKER informed the house that he had re-
ceived a letter in this case, stating that it was not in-
tended to go on with the petition.

PRIVATE BILLS.

The following private bills were read a third time and
passed :—Caledonian Railway (Connecting Branch with
Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway, &c.) ; North and.
South Western Junction Railway (Hammersmith) ;
Sunderland Dock ; Victoria (London) Docks ; South
Eastern Railway (Reading Extension, &c.)
PETITIONS.

Mr. G. PALMER presented a..._ petition from the
borough of Preston, against the bill for the registration

of :assurances.

(Sir E. FILMER presented a petition from Maid-
stone, praying for the total repeal of the hop duty.
Mr. .11f U.NTZ presented a petition from Birmingham,
praying that the elective franchise might be extended to
the London University.
Mr. BROWN presented a petition from 32 prisoners
confined in the Preston gaol, praying the house to take
steps to prevent the demoralising effects of unlicensed
beer-houses.

Mr. WHALLEY presented a petition from Peter-
borough, praying the house to legalise marriage with a
deceased wife's sister.

Mr. SPOONER presented a petition from the attor-
neys and solicitors of Birmingham, against the Regis-
tration of Assurances Bill.

Mr. TURNER presented a peition from a place in
the north against the opening of the Crystal Palace on
Sundays.
Mr. M. MILNES presented a petition from a book-
seller, praying that foreign books might be admitted
duty free.
Mr. M. GIBSON presented a similar petition from
Manchester.

Mr. DUFFY presented a petition from New Ross,
maying that the income tax might not be extended to
reland.

DOCKYARD PROMOTIONS.

Mr. KEATING gave notice that, when the evidence
taken before the Dockyard Committee on the subject
of dockyard promotions had been fully considered by
honourable members, he should call the attention of the
house to it, and submit a motion upon it. The case of
Lieutenant Ingledue was referred to the same com-
mittee, and as it had not yet been reported upon, he
was not able to state the precise terms of his mo-
tion, but this he could state, that he should frame
it not in reference to the conduct of particular indi-
viduals, but make it general as regarded the proceedings
of the late Board of Admiralty in relation to the
matters referred to the committee.
EDUCATION BILL.

Mr. E. HINDLEY gave notice that on Monday he
should ask the noble lord at the head of the
Government whether he thought it would be possible,
considering the advanced period of the session, to get
through his educational scheme.

ISLE OF MAN.
Mr. EWART wished to know when the bill for alter-
ing the Customs Duties of the Isle of Man was likely t o
be sent out to the island ?
Mr. WILSON thought it would be ready in the
early part of next week.
CUSTOMS ACTS.

In reply to questions from Mr. W. Bitowx,
Mr. WILSON said the bill for consolidating the
whole of the customs acts was in a forward state of
preparation, and he hoped to be able to lay it on the
table in the course of a fortnight.
IRISH DRAINAGE COMMISSION.
In reply to questions from Col. DUNNE,
Mr. WILSON ,said the report of the Irish drainage
commissioners was now ready, and would be laid on the
table neat week.
THE AFFAIRS OF THE PORTE.—THE HOLY