The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-10 00:00:00

fihnuxng
Ant

LONDON. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 1847.

The Lords met at Five.

A short, but somewhat sharp conversation took place
between the Earl of LUCAN, Lord BROUGHAM, and the
Marquis of LONDONDERRY, on the subject of the attack
made by Lord BROUGHAM on a former evening, on the
Irish landlords, which ended by Lord BROUGHAM moving
t'or returns of the names of the plaintiffs and defendants
in all processes for rent due in November, 1846, which
were brought on for trial on the 11th .January last, at
Balling, in the county of Mayo.
The motion was agreed to, and their Lordships ad•
j ourned.
The Commons met at Four o'clock.

Mr, SHARI.IAN:CRAWTORD gave notice+ that on the 23d
of March he should move for leave to bring in a Bill to
repeal the Act, making Parliament septennial.
Mr. EWART moved for leave to bring in a Bill to
gbolish the punishment of death.
Dr. BOWRING seconded the motion.

A debate ensued, in the course of which the House
was addressed by Sir G. GREY, Mr. EitiME, Sir H. Is-
Gus and Mr. BROTHERTON, when the House divided,
the numbers being—

For the motion —. 41
Against it . 81
Majority —4o
Mr. MILNER GIBBON obtained leave to bring in a Bil:
for the collection of agricultural statistics.
The other orders being disposed of, the House ad•
journed at a Quarter to Eight o'clock.

Lively and humorous as was the speech delivered
on Monday evening by the lion. Gentleman the
Member for Bath, we are gratified that the pro-
position which it embodied received such an imme-
diate and decided negative. As the Right Hon.
Baronet, the late Premier, observed towards the
close of the discussion, although the question put by
Mr. ROEBUCK was of the highest importance, this
was most assuredly not the fittest moment for its con-
sideration. To describe the gist of the proposal in
plain language, it amounts to a demand that a rigid
system of taxation should be imposed upon Ireland
in the very midst of the crisis by which its
fortunes have been rendered insolvent. The effect
of this extraordinary and ill-timed motion
was striking and instantaneous. A. movement, par-
tially of panic and partially of indignation, was per-
ceptible among the phalanx of Irish representatives.
Nor was the opposition without the sympathy or co-
operation of the English Members. Parliament
Scarcely ever evinced a greater unanimity in the re-
jection of any scheme. All sections of political
opinion coincided in railing against the introduction
of such a plan at a time so peculiarly unpropitious ;
and the dismay arid hostility manifested on its in-
felicitous introduction was scarcely inferior to that
expressed by the followers of EDWARD I. when
startled by the voice of the bard on the Welsh
mountains.
" Stout BENTINCK stood aghast in speechless trance;
To arms! cried LaisoucliznE, and couched his quiver-
ing lance."

We are by no means amazed at the cordiality with
which Mr. ROEBUCK'S proposition was rejected,
although we must confess that there is no small de:
izree of justice in his vituperations of a considerable
number of the Irish landowners. What, let us in-
quire, however, is the bare practicability of this
extension of taxation beyond St. George's Channel?
Is it practicable ? Would it--could it tend in any
appreciable extent to the increase of the revenue ?
There is an old stubborn proverb which informs us
of the impossibility of getting blood from a flint ;
and we might as well practise phlebotomy upon a
flint as endeavour to extract money from a penniless
community, or expect to obtain a per centage
upon incomes which the landlords find it impossible
to gather in. Besides this, it becomes a question
whether the landowners of Ireland are not already in
a position somewhat analogous to the position of those
among their brethren in England who are directly
subject to the drain of the income-tax. A few
syllables will at once explain our meaning. Pre-
suming that the income-tax, as levied in the other
portions of the United Kingdom, were extended to
Ireland, a sum approaching to 450,0001. would be
collected, seeing that the average rate of taxation
upon incomes is 3 per cent., and calculating
that the average rental of Ireland amounts
annually to 15,000,000/. Now it is determined by
Parliament, that out of the 10,000,0001. advanced for
the salvation of the starving peasantry, the landlords
of Ireland shall repay one entire half, namely
5,000,0001., in instalments, extending over a period
of ten years. In point of fact, then, this is
a fair equivalent for the revenue derivable from an
income-tax. But Mr. RoEnucz. is solicitous to
behold no longer such a striking disparity between
the English landowner and Irish landowner that
the former is subjected to an onerous pay-
ment from which the latter is altogether released.
We should rejoice ourselves to see the equalization of
the burden.upon both.thesejdivisions of landlords, but--
and just now that important but comprises everything
—but we must first see the influx of rental
into the pockets of both classes of landlords
equalized. As the Honourable Member for Kilkenny
very justly observed, the incomes of the landowners
of Ireland are now more than ever precarious,
dwindling down in proportion to the deepening im-
poverishment of their afflicted tenants. And it is
these precarious and attenuated incomes that the Hon.
Member for Bath would submit to a strenuous and
inexorable taxation. The extraordinary division of
121 to 26 evinced significantly enough the sentiments
with which the House of Commons listened to this
inappropriate proposal. Morally persuaded that the
proprietary •of Ireland should be called upon
to assist earnestly in the extrication of
their suffering fellow-countrymen from the abyss
of their present desolation, we cannot coincide with
Mr. RoEnucx in regarding this as the most oppor.
tune moment for enlarging the liability of
5,000,0001. which already impends over, anti which
they must liquidate within the ten years ensuing.
From this consideration especially, and from the
nearly unparalleled poverty of the island, we con-
gratulate the Irish landowners upon the decisive
rejection of Mr. ROEBUCK'S scheme. At a period of
less wretchedness, the question may be revived with
m
ore generosity and subjected to a calmer deliberation.

When England .has so nobly and generously come
forward for the relief of Irish destitution—when the
Imperial Legislature has so readily sanctioned the