The Sun.
London, England, 1853-07-02 00:00:00

education, which might do very well for France or Prussia,
but which would never suit the people of England.

Lord J. RUSSELL wished to call the attention of the
committee to the state of the question as it stood. The
question had been fully debated at a period when there was
a good attendance of members, which unfortunately was
not the case at the present hour, and his right hon. friend
having then proposed to repeal two-thirds of the duty,
which was a very considerable reduction, he could hardly
have expected that that would bring upon his right hon.
friend so much reproach. (Hear, hear.) His right hon.
friend the member for Manchester proposed a total repeal,
and in a house containing more than 200 members
the committee decided in favour of the proposition of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer. Everybody then thought
that the question was decided ; and he thought that to at-
tempt to reverse that decision now, when the house was
so much thinner, was hardly fair or consistent with the
usual forms of the house. Then it was said that his right
hon. friend was proceeding against a former vote of the
house. That was no doubt true ; but the question really
came to this—whether the repeal or the reduction of taxes
was to be carried by separate votes of the house, or whe-
ther the Chancellor of the Exchequer was to be listened to
in the first instance, and his propositions to be accepted or
rejected. Undoubtedly, the house could take the former
of the two courses ; but in that case the office of Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer could hardly be one of much utility.
The other course had been taken in this instance—the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had laid before the house
his plan of finance for the year ; and the qustion was
now whether the plan of his right honourable friend,
which had hitherto met with muoh favour—in the
country as well as in the house—should be reversed.
(Hear, hear.) The house had already decided in favour of
the proposition of his right hon. friend, and he submitted
that that decision, which removed two-thirds of the duty,
ought to be acquiesced in. He would not enter into the
question either of the advertisement duty or of the stamp
duty. He had no doubt that the preponderance of argu-
ment was in favour of the abolition of both. (Loud cheers.)
IV hen he was First Lord of the Treasury he had various
deputations coming to him, 30 or 40 gentlemen, pleading
against the continuance of this or that tax; and really their
aguments in favour of the abolition of every tax were suite
overwhelming. (Laughter.) He never got up and said to
them in reply that the tax on paper, for instance, or on
soap, or on malt, was a useful tax; ho never argued,because
he never felt, as if there was any advantage in these taxes.
They were to be considered with regard to the general fi-
nance of the country. They had been so considered—the
committee had pronounced its decision—and he hoped
hon. gentlemen would now attempt to reverse that deci-
sion by taking advantage of the absence of those who were
ready to urge arguments which at the time were not pro-
duced.

After a short pause,
Lord J. RUSSELL again rose, and said there was one
other matter which he ought to have mentioned in connec-
tion with the question now before the committee. A re-
duction of duty was proposed. If the proposition should
be carried to make it nil, it would be necessary to bring in
a bill for the purpose of repealing the duty. Of course
that bill would be laid before the house, and the result
would be, that in the meantime the tax would remain
what it now was, ls. 6d. (Cheers.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said a par-
ticular request had been made to him, and he considered
it a just request on the part of the hon. member for Man-
chester, that whatever was done on this matter should be
done after full and clear notice. The hon. member gave a
notice which was understood to raise, and which did raise
distinctly, the question, whether the proposition of the
Government should be accepted, or whether the duty
should be totally repealed. He had met that question
fairly, and a vote of the house had been taken on it. The
hon. member did not give him notice that the vote was to
be taken twice on the same night, and he did not think
the hon. member was aware of any such intention. If he
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had been aware of it,
he should, of course, have been prepared to meet it. If
the hon. member wished to prolong the discussion on the
subject, he must have legitimate opportunities of so doing;
but he must appeal to the hon. member not to take part in
voting a second time on the same subject on the same
night. (Hear.)
The committee then divided on the question that 6d.
stand part of the resolution. The numbers were—
Ayes
Noes..

68

Majority against the Government proposition 5

The CHAIRMAN then read the resolution in the fol-
lowing form :—" That from and after the sth day of July,
1853, in lieu of the duties now payable on advertisements,
shall be paid for or in respect of any advertisement con-
tained in, or published with, any gazette or other news-
paper, or any other periodical paper, or in or with any
pamphlet or literary work, O. Os. Od."
The committee then divided. The numbers were—
Ayes 7O
Noes 6l

Majority

On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX-
CHEQUER, the chairman was then directed to report
progress, and ask leave to sit again.
The house having resumed,

Mr. HUAIE said he should like to know from the
Speaker how far the proceedings which had just taken
place were correct. The committee had come to a second
division, and he wished to ask if it was competent to do
so ? A motion was made to negative tho " 6d.," and the
committee had done so. A second motion was made to
put in " 0." One party voted for " 0," and the other
against " 0," and the " o's" carried it. (Laughter.) He
did not recollect such an occurrence having ever taken
place before, and thought it very desirable for the house
to receive such information as would guide them from fall-
ing into any error. (Hear.)
Mr. BOUVERIE said the house would perhaps allow
him to state what the questions really were. On the third
resolution on the stamp duty, imposing a duty of 6d. on
advertisements, an honourable member proposed that
" 6d." should be omitted and "0" inserted. He put the
question, and a division took place on the proposition
" that 6d. stand part of the resolution." That proposition
was negatived, and " 6d." was struck out. Then he put
the main resolution with " 0" at the end, and that was
carried in the affirmative. That was the resolution which
he had been directed to report to the house, and he sub-
mitted that there had been nothing informal in the pro-
ceeding. (Hear, hear.)
The SPEAKER said the questions for the committee to
decide were, first, whether `• 6d." should stand part of the
resolution or not—and next, whether they would agree to
the resolution without " 6d." being inserted. It appeared
to him that the proceedings had been perfectly formal and
regular. (Hear, hear.)
The report was then ordered to be raceived on Monday.
SUCCESSION DUTY BILL.
The consideration of this bill in committee was resumed.
Clause 21 having been put,
The CHAIRMAN read a proviso which Sir W. Jolliffe
had upon a former evening declared it to be his intention
to introduce into the clause. The proviso was to the fol-
lowing effect :—" Providedlalways that the value of any
timber growing upon the land bo not included in the said
estimate."

Sir W. JOLLIFFE here signified it to be his intention
to withdraw the proviso.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
should oppose the motion for its withdrawal, because he
believed the insertion of the words in question had been
propmed for the purpose of calling upon the house to de-
clare that no tax whatever should be laid upon timber
under the Succession Duty Bill.
Sir J. PAKINGTON thought the right hon. gentleman
could not be perfectly aware of the circumstances under
which the proviso in question had been moved. His hon.
friend had taken the best advice upon the question, whether
the proviso was necessary to prevent the former part of the
clause from including timber, and the information which
lie had obtained was that no such proviso was necessary.
Under those circumstances, therefore, he had no wish to
press it upon the consideration of the committee. If his
hon. friend were not permitted to withdraw the proviso,
he (Sir J. Pakington) hoped he would allow it to be nega-
tived without a division.
After a few observations from the CHANCELLOR of
the EXCHEQUER and Sir W. JOLLIFFE, the proviso
was withdrawn.

The clause, as amended, was then agreed to.
Clause 22.
The consideration of this clause was, at the suggestion
of Mr. HENLEY and Mr. VANSITTART, postponed.
Clause 23, which lays down the rule as to advowsons,
having been proposed,
Mr. HENLEY said he believed that the clause, by levy-
ing the duty on the presentation, when that right should
be sold, would press with undue severity in the case of a
person who might happen to be able to make the sale two
or three times in the course of his life.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the clause had been framed with a view to deal as leniently
as possible with that species of property. It was desirable
that they should give every discouragement which they
could fairly offer to the sale of ad.vowsons ; and it was
therefore proposed that the right should be taxed in those
cases only in which it was absolutely sold.
Mr. G. BUTT said he believed that descriptian of pro-
perty -was very liberally dealt with in the clause.
Mr. MALINS thought it was not worth while to tax
that description of property at all.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that of
all kinds of property he knew of none which had a less
claim to exemption from taxation than an advowson which
was &dually sold.
The clause was then ordered to stand part of the bill.
Clause 24 was agreed to.
Clause 25, which lays down the rule as to taxation of
manors and mines, having been put,
Mr.. NEWDEGATE said he wished to know whether a
person who had the fee-simple of a mineral estate would be
charged on the same principle as a person who had a life
interest only in such an estate ?
ThR, CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied in
the affirmative.

Mr.. G. BUTT said he did not understand how that
clause which gave an alternative as to the mode of valua-
tion vas to be carried into effect. The first part of the
claw3el provided that the yearly value of a mine should be
calculated by the average profits derived therefrom, after
deducting the necessary out-goings during such number of
prec,Nling years as might be agreed on btween the com-
missi,oners and the successor. He did not sea that any
powecr was given for effecting such an agreement.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
if the agreement were not come to the alternative which
was offered in that portion of the clause would not come
into the agreement ; but the party might, if he pleased,
resist that inducement.

Mr. G. BUTT thought it would be better to fix on a cer-
tain n umber of years for the purpose of the valuation.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
believed that in case of mineral property it would in many
cases be found most inconvenient that that proposal should
be adopted.

Sir J. PABINGTON said that nothing could show
more ;strikingly than that clause the excessive difficulty
and 11 to risk of injustice which were incurred in imposing a
snows. sion duty. The right hon. gentleman the Chancellor
of tb.e Exchequer did not by that clause give the successor
the rs,me option which he gave him in the clause with re-
spect, to timber, of paying on an average of receipts, or on
the capital value of the property. He (Sir J. Pakington)
knevr at the present moment several instances of mining
prop arty which would be affected by this clause. He would
suppose a case where a mine had been just opened and a
vein struck. Suppose then a succession to take place ; how
coula it be possible to ascertain an average value in that
case': (Hear, hear.) He should move, by way of amend-
ment, the omission of the following words :—" Or if no
such :period shall be agreed upon, then the principal value
of tit*, property shall be ascertained, and the annual value
then, of shall be considered to be equal to the interest, cal-
ng at the rate of 3/. per cent. per annum on the
amea nt of such principal value." (Hear, hear.)
Tlat 3 CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that

the case referred to was one of very frequent occurrence,
and came before them every day in the shape of leasehold
interests. The right hon. baronet would see that the
amendment, if carried, would render the clause altogether
inoperative.

In reply to Mr. HENLEY,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
meaning of the word " mine" referred only to mines that
were open, but (lid not apply to cases where mineral was
known to exist, but where the vein had not been opened.
Mr. G. BUTT altogether dissented from the construc-
tion put upon the word " mine" by the right hon. Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, and appealed to his hon. and
leaned friends, the Attorney and Solicitor Generals, to
say if such was the correct and legal meaning which was
meant to be conveyed by the word " mine."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL explained that the clause
referred to open mines, and that its meaning was apparent
from its subsequent wording.
Mr. MITCHELL suggested the introduction of the
words, after the word "mine," "yielding profit," and
that words should also be introduced to provide that the
profits should be determined by arbitration in case of
dispute.

kr. BOOKER suggested the addition of the following
words, viz., "That the yearly value of any manor, mine,
or other real property, producing a fluctuating yearly in-
come, shall either be calculated upon the average profits
or the income derived thereon."

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he was
not disposed to offer any objection to the addition of those
words, and would feel obliged to the hL,n. gentleman giving
him the words in writing.
The clause was then agreed to.
Mr. G. BUTT complained of the indefinite wording of
the 26th clause.

Mr. PELLATT moved in this clause, according to notice;
that after the words " body corporate," the words " cor-
poration sole, whether lay or ecclesiastical," should be in-
serted. He thought that as the clergy of the Church of
England drew so large a sum from the national finances,
they ought to pay their fair proportion of the tax.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (interrupt-
ing the hon. member) assured him that his amendment
would not add to the stringent effect of the clause. Every
corporation sole, whether lay or ecclesiastical, was beyond
all doubt a body corporate, and would be subject to the
operation of the clause.

Mr. Pellatt's amendment having been withdrawn,
The clause, with some verbal alterations, was agreed to,
and ordered to stand part of the bill.
Clauses 27 and 28 were also agreed to.
On clause 29 being proposed,
Mr. MALINS moved that the chairman report progress.
In reply to Lord R. GROSVENOR,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he pro-
posed devoting the whole of Monday evening to the consi-
deration of the remaining clauses of this bill ; and that he
should not stop in the bill for the purpose of going to the
Stamp Duties Bill, which, however, would stand nest on
the orders after the Succession Duty Bill.
Mr. AGLIONBY—As the right hon. gentleman said he
would devote the whole of Monday evening to the clauses
of this bill, he wished to know when the question of tim-
ber, postponed to-night, would be considered ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—It would
come on at the end of the bill.
The house then resumed, and
The CHAIRMAN reported progress, and obtained leave
to sit again. _ _

The Resident Magistrates (Ireland) Bill was read a third
time, and passed.
The Common Lodging-houses Bill was read a third time.
SHERIFFS' COURTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.

The LORD ADVOCATE moved the third reading of
this bill.

The bill was read a third time and passed.
SPITALFIELDS AND SHOREDITCII IMPROVE-

MENT BILL.
Tho house went into committee on this bill.
When the house resumed,

The Battersea Park Park 'Bill was read a third time and
passed.

WESTMINSTER-BRIDGE BILL.
On the third reading of this bill,
Mr. FREWEN said, according to the plans which had
been submitted to the select committee, the elevation of
this bridge was put down at 25 feet 6 inches above high
watermark, but by the decision of the committee, carried
by the vote of the First Commissioner of Public Works, the
elevation was reduced to 20 feet. This would materially
affect the navigation, as a sufficient space was not left under
the bridge for barges with straw, and it would also inter-
fere with the arrangements for conveying coal up the river.
He thought the bill had been slipped through in a very ob-
jectionable way ; but as he believed it would be opposed
in another place he would not now attempt to arrest its
progress.

Mr. PELLATT should like to hear what arrangements
were made with reference to the temporary bridge, when
the works would be begun, and when they would be
finished ?

Mr. ALCOCK objected to the way in which this bill had
been pushed through the house, and concurred in what had
been said as to the inadequate headway under the bridge.
The Houses of Parliament had been made 10 or 15 feet too
low, and this bridge was to be sacrificed in consequence of
the blunder. Vauxhall-bridgo was six feet above the height
proposed for Westminster. bridge; and the want of suffi-
cient headway in the now bridge would be a positive in-
jury to the owners of wharves above the bridge, though he
admitted the decreasing of the ascent for vehicles would be
au advantage. He thought that the Commissioner of
Works ought to consent to give a headway of 24 feet instead
of 20.

Sir W. MOLESWORTH said that the present bridge
was sufficient for the traffic of the river, and yet the most
available arch had but a headway of between 20 and 21
feet, and the new bridge would have a headway of 20 feet
with more than twice the width of the existing arch. That
would be amply sufficient for the present and prospective
traffic of the river, while at the same time the traffic across
the river by land would bo greatly facilitated. The hon.
gentleman said the bridge was intended to be made low in
order not to injure the effect of the new houses of Parlia-
ment. He (Sir W. 3lolesworth) confe„ssed, while consult-
ing the convenience of the river traffic, that it was one of
his objects not to injure the effect of the new building,
which was one of the finest specimens of architecture of its
kind in the world.

Mr. HENLEY thought the explanation given by the
Commissioner of Works most unsatisfactory. There were
bridges below and a.bove Westminster-bridge with a much
higher headway than that proposed to be given to the new
bridge ; and yet by limiting the headway of the new bridge
the convenience derived from the higher headway of the
other bridges would be lost, and a permanent barrier op-
posed to the traffic of the river.
Sir C. BURRELL moved the adjournment of the debate.
The house divided :
For the adjournment of the debate
Against it

Majority

.....

On re-entering the gallery we found
Lord C. HAMILTON protesting against precipi ►,ation in
deciding upon thin matter. Our architecture was already
quite a sufficient reproach to us in the eyes of foreigners,
and it was most desirable that we should not add to the
number of our daTe,cts in that respect.
The house then divided on the third reading of the bill.
The numbers were :
For the third reading 34
Against it .

Majority..

The bill was th‘erefore read a third time and passed.
The further consideration of the Public-houses (Scot-
land) Bill was poutponed till Monday next, and the house
adjourned. at half-past one o'clock.

FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE of YESTERDAY.

CROWN-OFFICE, JUNE 29.

MEMBER RETURNED TO SERVE IN THIS PRESENT PARLIA-

MENT.

Borough of Stroud—Edward Horsman, Esq:; in the room
of Henry John M:oroton, commonly called Lord Moreton,
now Earl of Duci e, summoned to the House of Peers.
WAR-OFFICE, JULY 1.

10th Regiment of Light Dragoons—Cornet Dundas Rein-
hardt Gill to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Clements,
who retires ; Comet Henry Baring, from the 2d Dragoons,
to be Cornet, vices Gill, July 1.
16th Light Dragoons—Lieutenant Robert Goff to be
Captain, by purohase, vice Spicer, who retires ; Cornet
Edward Tottenham Irvine to be Lieutenant, by purchase,
vice Goff July 1.

Coldstream Re giment of Foot. Guards—Serjeant-Major
Alexander Falconer, of the Coldstream Guards, to be
Quartermaster, v ice Morse, deceased, July 1.
6th Foot—Cal damn James Palliser Costobadie, from
half-pay Unattaclhed, to be Captain, vice Reginald Peel,
who exchanges ; Lieutenant Richard Thompson to be Cap-
tain, by purchase, vice Costobadie, who retires ; Ensign
Richard. Henry Goodwin to be Lieutenant, by purchase,
vice Thompson, J.-illy 1.
13th Foot—Lic rutenant Hugh Maurice Jones to be Cap-
tain, by purchase, vice Busby, who retires; Ensign John
Augustus Fuller to be LieutenAt, by purchase, vice Jones;
Thomas Tyacke, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice
Fuller, July 1.
18th Foot—Lieutenant Charles Woodwright to be Cap-
tain, without purchase, vice Cockburn deceased ; Ensign
George William Stackpoole to be Lieutenant, without
purchase, vice Woodwright, March 21.

19th Foot—Liou tenant George Bingham Jennings, to
be Captain, witluout purchase, vice Brevet-Lieutenant-
Colonel Charles aighmore Potts, who retires upon full-
pay ; Ensign Henry Turner Uniacke, to be Lieutenant,
without purchase, vice Jennings ; Gentleman Cadet Am-
brose Marshall Qtr dew, from the Royal Military College,
to be Ensign, witaitout purchase, vice Uniacke, July 1.
36th Foot-L-Captain Charles Woodwright, from the 18th
Foot, -to be Captain, vice Coote, who retires upon half-pay,
18th Foot, July 1..
37th Foot—En sign Robert William Webb to be Lieuten-
ant, by purchase, -vice Hobson, who retires, July 1.
54th Foot—St tuff-Surgeon of the Second Class Eneas
Mackintosh Macpb erson to be Surgeon, vice Webster, who
exchanges, July
68th Foot—Erisign Harrison Walker J. Trent to be
Lieutenant, by p urchase, vice Nicol, who retires, July 1.
70th Foot—Lioutenant Arthur Henry Creswell Snow to
be Adjutant, vie", Rutherford, promoted, May 6.
87th Foot—As sistant-Surgeon George Pishey Thompson
Hill, from the I.`,7th Foot, to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice
Banon, promoted in the 96th Foot, July 1.
96th Foot—Lienutenant William Munnings Lees, to be
Adjutant, vice R. F. W. Cumberland, promoted, May 6 ;
Assistant-Surgeo-a Richard George Davys Banon, from the
87th Foot, to be Surgeon, vice Lucas, promoted on the
Staff, July 1.
HOSPITAL STA YF.—Surgeon William Lucas,
from the
96th Foot, to be• Staff-Surgeon of the First Class, vice
Peter Robertson, :M.D., who retires upon half-pay ; Assis-
tant Staff-Surgeon, Thomas Guy, M.D., to be Staff-Sur-
geon of the Second class, vice Edward Robertson, deceased ;
Surgeon George h lurray Webster, M.D., from the 54th
Foot, to be Staff-s urgeon of the Second Class, vice Mac-
pherson, who exchanges ; Alexander Clarke, Ross, M.D.,
to be Assistant-Sw .geon to the Forces, vice Guy, promoted,
July 1.
BREVET.—The under-mentioned cadets of the East
India Company's Service,
to have the local and tempo-
rary rank of EasKgn, during the period of their being
placed under the command of Colonel D. Jones, of the
Royal Engineers,, for field instructions in the art of sapping
and mining ihn Underwood Champain, Gent. ; Robert
Charles Boileau Pemberton, Gent. ' • Robert Home, Gent. •
William Strove r, Gent. ; John Richardson Maunsell,
Gent. ; Harry P:r.m, Gent. ; William Chrystie, Gent., Ist
July.

MEMORANDUM.- —The removal of Ensign Henry from the
86th Foot to a C ornetcy in the 14th Light Dragoons, on
the 10th June, 181 3, and the appointment of Mr. Thomas
Tyacke to an Ens igney in the former Corps, on the same
day, have been can celled.

OFFICE OF ORDNANCE—JuxE 29.
Royal Regimelit of Artillery=—Second Captain, Thomas