The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-07 00:00:00

tion with the tax. Under the circumstances he must there-
fore oppose the motion.
Mr. MICHELL was understood to move that the Chair-
man report progress.
Lord A. VANE hoped the hon. gentleman would carry
his amendment to a division. He had heard hon. gentle-
men opposite give up principles to which they pledged
theMselvei the same as he did. The basis of the income
tax was an extension for seven years; and as it was a broad
principle that the man who earned his bread by hard la-
bour should not be compelled to pay in the same propor-
tion as the man who sat in his easy chair and did nothing,
he (Lord A. Vane) should not recede from it on this occa-
sion. As long, therefore, as he had a vote in that house
he would record it in favour of that principle. He had
heard every point of the financial scheme objected to,
and yet hon. members professed to vote for the
whole budget. The whole was composed of all its parts ;
and as he objected to the chief part, he should vote against
the continuance of the income tax as it stood. Without
pledging himself to the terms of the amendment, he would
vote for the principle to which he had given his assent, in
case of a division. He would not accept the whole when
he objected to the chief part.
Mr. SPOONER suggested that the hon. member for
Bodmin should modify his amendment. To impose a tax
upon 1001. a year was to tax labour. He admitted the
difficulty of graduating the tax ; but he thought there
could be no difficulty in fixing a minimum sum. A hun-
dred a year was too low. The lowest should be 1501. The
principle of the proposition of the hon. member—namely,
a graduation of the tax, he (Mr. Spooner) was prepared to
support at the fitting opportunity ; and its adoption would
have the effect of getting rid of the expense of the staff
of clerks now employed at Somerset House to regulate the
exemptions. He therefore advised the hon. member not
to press his amendment on that occasion, but to avail him-
self of another opportunity.
The amendment was accordingly withdrawn.
Mr. PALMFR then rose to move the following amend-
ment :—" After the words ' for every twenty shillings of
the annual value of amount thereof,' insert ' such annual
value of any lands, tenements, or hereditaments, being the
net annual value thereof, after due allowance made for re-
pairs, insurance, and management."
A conversation arose as to the expediency of proceeding
with the amendment, or whether the hon. member should
move that the Chairman report progress and obtain leave
to, sit again.
Mr. W. MILES hoped the latter suggestion would be
persevered in, as the amendment affected the real property
of this country, which was taxed at 9d, in the pound, while
other property was taxed only at 7d.
After some further remarks the consideration of the pro-
position was adjourned to Monday ; the Chairman left the
chair, and the house resumed.
EXCHEQUER BILLS.
- - -

_
On the motion of Mr. WILSON, the house went into
committee on the Exchequer Bills Bill.

CUSTOMS' ACTS.

The report upon this bill was brought up and received.

SALES OF BULLION BILL.
This bill, as amended, was considered.
ENTAILS (SCOTLAND) BILL.

Mr. DUNLOP proposed certain amendments in this
bill.

The LORD ADVOCATE believed that the house was
aware that entails in Scotland had, up to the year 1848,
been in fact a perpetuity, and except under a statute called
the Montgomery Act, it was almost impossible for any heir
to an entail to make a provision for his children. In the
year 1848, however, the whole question of Scotch entails
had been carefully considered in that house and consider-
able improvements had been effected in that system. Now
his hon. and learned friend wished to interfere with the
prohibition upon certain entails dating subsequent to the
year 1848. In his (the Lord Advocate's) opinion the house
ought to deliberate before they resolved to repeal the 12th
section of an act which had been passed into law after so
much consideration. He should therefore request his hon.
and learned friend not to press his amendment.
Mr. CRATJFURD complained that a question of so
much importance should have been brought on at so late
a period of the night. He deprecated the idea that be-
cause great reforms had been effected in the system of
entails in Scotland the house should therefore refuse to
enter upon a course of still more extensive improvements.
He trusted his hon. friend would divide the house upon .
the question, and ascertain if the Government were really
devoted to the cause of law reform or not.
Mr. C. BRUCE objected to grafting the propositions of
the hon. and learned gentleman (Mr. Dunlop) upon the
measure before the house, and he trusted the Lord Advo-
cate would confine the object of the bill to that which it
was designed to effect—namely, the facilitating of pro-
ceedings under Lord Rutherford's Act.
Lord J. RUSSELL hoped the hon. and learned gentle-
man (Mr. Dunlop) would not press his amendment, but
bring it forward as a distinct proposition.
The house divided, and there appeared—
For Mr. Dunlop's clause
Against it
Majority against the clause • —96
The report was' then received, and the bill ordered to be
read a third time on a future day.
. Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to name the 13th
of June as the day on which he should move for leave to
bring in a bill to prevent persons holding dockyard and
other appointments from voting at elections.

NEW WRIT.
On the motion of Mr. CRAUFUED a new writ was or-
dered to be issued for the borough of Maidstone.
The remaining business on the paper having been dis-
posed of, the house adjourned at one o'clock.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.