The Sun.
London, England, 1823-03-18 00:00:00

'FUESDAY, MARCH 18, 1823.

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE 'OF LORDS NARCII 17.
Appeals were resumed from twelve till nearly four o'clock,
but there was nothing of interest.
Sir T. ACKLAND and others brought up the General Turn-
pike Act Amendment gill, which was afterwards read a
first time.
Mr. WI,LBRAIIAM. and others brought up the Ireland Yeo-
manry Corps gig, which was also read a first time.
Mr. Trundle, from. the office of the Chief Secretary to the
Lord Lieutenant of Ireland; delivered in Copies of the Cor-
respondence that had. taken place between Ilia Majesty's Go-
vernment and Sir IVilliam Bradley King, pursuant to an Order
of this House.
Mr. Halt, from the Supt-Tintentling Committee of the rani-
tentiary at Millbank, delivered another riven, as directed by
the Act. •
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented a petition from
the Mayor and Corporation of Oxford, praying for the repeal
of the Insolvent Debtors' Act.

The Bill.for Improving Portman-square was read a second
time, as were likewise some Private Bsll4
Lord ELLENIIOROUVH presented a pet tin from a Mr.
John Smith, baker,
,of Rugby, Viratmllt4Wre, praying tbr
the repeal of the Insolvent Debtors' Art. He hoped, his Lord-
ship said, -that the Noble and Learned Lordllledestlale), who
'had given his name to the Bill, would now also give his best
attention to those petitions which prayed for the repeal of the
present Inc;. No measure hail, in his opinion, done more mis-
chief than the Bill in question.
The -LORD CHANCELLOR could not admit that his
Noble and Learned Friend (Redesdale) had given his sanction
to the Bill alluded by the Noble Lord. That Noble and Learn-
ed Friend had never given his name to the Bill, which, in ef-
fect, was spoiled by the iinprorements it had undergone in the
other House. The principle had, indeed, been recognized by'
Noble Lords on both sides of this House, and should not lightly
be abandoned.
Upon the motion of the Earl of SHAiTESBUR V, the Iris
Arms Carrying Bill and the Assessed Taxes Reduction Ittll
were read a second time, and committed for to-morrow ; and
afterwards the House adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Mr. WING, presented a petition from the inhabitants of
the.parish of St. George, Illiddlesex, against the Insolvent
Debtors' Act; and another front the same parties against the
Coal Duties.
Mr. Sheriff Lucas was introduced to the bar, and presented
a petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common
Coundil of the City of London, praying for a consolidation of
the Sewers' Acts,
3lr. PELHAM presented a petition from Whitelturch,
against the Insolvent DebtorS' Act.
Sir THOMAS ACLAND presented a petition front the
inhabitants of Ilfracombe against the Coal Duty.
Sir J. NEWPORT presented a petition from the Chamber
of Commerce of the City of Dublin, against any alteratlon in
the Sugar Duties.
Mr. C. H. HUTCHINSON presented a similar petition
front the merchants of Cork. The Hon. Gentleman observed,
that the Mercantile interests of Ireland would be seriously af-
fected by the contemplated alteration in the sugar duties; such
a measure would destroy the only beneficial foreign trade car.
ried on in that country.
11r. V. FITZtiERALD said, that petitions would, he had
no 4loubt, be transmitted from all the sea-ports of Ireland
against the proposed alteration,
Lord lii LGRA VE presented a petition from Chester,against
the Insolvent Debtors Act.
On the motion of Mr. Alderman WOOD, the London-
bridge Bill,was ordered to be read a second time, and com-
mitted.

MARRIAGE ACT.
Dr. PHILLIMORE postponed his motion for a Committee
on the ;Marriage Act Amendment. Bill unta this day. week..—...
He explained that the object of his Bill was to amend the pro-
visions introduced by the Lords into the Bill of the last Ses-
sion'; but as their Lordships bad originated a Bill to repeal
what had been done, he was anxious to wait the return of
such a Bill to the House, and on that account he proposed this
postponement.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY and Mr. WETISERELL said a few
Words, merely upon the form of the' proceeding.
DIVISION OF COUNTIES BILL.
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE ;proposed the second reading of the
division of counties Bill, the object of which was to delind in
a more explicit manner than at present the authority of the
Divisional Justices.
Mr. S. WORTLEY was not aware of the necessity of such
a Bill.
Sir M. W: RIDLEY thought it unnecessary, and would
therefore propose as an amendment, that it be read a second
time this day six months.
Mr. S. BOURNE was anxious that the nature of the Bill
should be better understood ; the aniaMlinent"was, he thought,
premature.
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE said, that ample time would be
given for that purpose.before the committal of the Bill.
Sir M. W. 'RIDLEY consented to withdraw his amend-
ment, and the Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed on the sth of April.
On the motion of Mr. Secretary PEEL, the King's Property
Bill was read a third time, and passed.
Mr. HUMS gave notice, that he should to-morrow move
for Returns respecting the Revenue and the Expenditure of
Ireland for the last three years, and for the whole period since
the Union.
NATIONAL DEBT REDEMPTION BILL.
the EXCHEQUER moved the
Order of CHANCELLOR
dlieNDCayEfLWortheit of the
reading of the National Debt
Redemption MIL
Mr. BENNET opposed the Bal. He contended that there
was no real Sinking Fund of 5,000,000/. The best way in
which the actual surplus could be disposed of was in the remis.
sion of taxes. He would put it to the House whether the
tuition of the country was so flourishing as to justify them in
allowing an unnecessary burthen of taxes to press upon the
people. Ile knew than any thing he could say would be use-
leis ;for the House and the Right lien. gentleman (the Chan_
cellor of the Exchequer) were such near relations, that any
thing the Right Hon. Gentleman might propose was sure to.be
successful. The Hon. Gentleman, atter arguing at sonic length
against the Bill, concluded by moving that it be read a third
time•that day six months.
Mr. WHITIMORE said he was friendly to the principle of
a Sinking Fund. From the statements of the Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) it was
clear that much advantage' had been derived from it, and there
were good grounds for expecting much more. To abandon
the principle would justly expose them to the insult and did•
sion of foreign countries. lie regretted, however, that the,
Sinking Fund was not limited. to the actual surplus of Re-
venue,.the Sinking;
for, with respect to the annuity system, was a com-
plete juggle. For their own credit it. should have haveheenitnand:
dboecnaeutise e
b4ildlidininsotetrths.in He
tehe dwnilradssu
to render it necessary to cut down their income to the actual
amount of expenditure.
Mr. HUME said, it wits a ghat error to suppose that the
reduction effected last yearin the Five per Gent*. was owing to
the Sinking Fund. It was not to the principle of a sinking
fund they were to attribute the rise in the value of their public
securities., The Right lion. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) brought the operation of the sinking flint', in the
reduction of debt, under the notice of the House from January
1816 to January 10.112; and said the effect had been to liquidate
debt to the amount of 24 millions. lie would *hew the .House
what the real state of the-case was and would take the accounts
of revenue anti expenditure during these six years frorn'the
Finanee'Report. In 1818 the revenue was 77 millions, and the
expenditure 83 milliohs. In 1817 the revenue was 57 millions,
and the expenditure 68 millions. In the years 1818,1810, 1820, and 1821, there was a small surplus of revenue. The total of
the revenue during these six years, from MI6 to 1822, was 373
millions, and the expenditure 372 millions, making 40 allow. ante of 2 millions for an error in the accounts of 1016, adding
to it a balance of 5 millions remaining' of the loan of 181 b,
and other items which lie would not enumerate; the wholesur-
plus during the six years was only 9,608,001. lied this: been
properly employed, 500,0001. Stock might have been redeemed
annually. But what had been the effect of the plan p y
urseed b
the late Chancellor of the' Eichequer ? In these Kix years,
Stock to the amount of M1,732;000/. was purchased, though the
actual surplus was only 9,500004 But how was this amount
of-Stock purchased? It was by creating a debt of 58 millions

to give to the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund ; this. wa3
exclusive of 36 million e borrowed from' the Conimissioners.......
His objection to the Bill was, that the country would he more
benefited by a remission of taxes, than by keeping up a sinking
fund under present circumstances. If, however, a sinking fund
was to be kept up, let it be disposed.of in lessening the capiud
of the debt, by converting permanent into terminable annuities.
His great objection, however, to the Bill was, that the Commis-
sioners of the Sinking Fund must always have 5 millions to
dispose of, even though the actual surplus should be no more
than five hundred thouearid pounds.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, this
subject had been discussed so often that it Was unnecessary for
hint to repeat in the arguments he employed on former oc.
casions. Were he to go into the question, he could do nailing
mere than repeat them. The Hon. Member for Shrewsbtily
(Mr. Bennet) said, the House of Commons and the Govern-
ment were so identified that opposition was useless, and that the
House and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) were' to be
considered in the light of near relations. If the support of that
Bill constituted -relationship, there were many who reit nearethe
Hon. Gentleman (Mt. Bennet) whom he (the Chancellor of
the Exchequer) had the honour of numbering among his rele-
dons, and be was Feud of it. The Honourable Member for
Aberdeen (Mt. Hume) represented him as having Milo-nett
ti ot the letitietion in the capital of the debt since 'the year
1816 was owing exclusively to the operation of the Sinking
Fund. lie affirmed no such thing; he attributed the result to
no particular cause, but stated merely the fact. lie (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) said, that taking the total amount of
funded and unfunded Debt in 1816, and not as the lion. Gen.
thinan (Mr. Hume) said 1822, but 1823, there appeared a con-
siderable reduction. On the sth of January 11;16, the whole
Debt, funded and unfunded, was 804 millions; on the eth of
January 1023 it was 840 millions. There had been, therefore,
by some process or other, a reduction of 24 millions. He did
not attribute it to the Sinking Fund. Restated the fact; and
then put it the Rouse, whether, when such had been the case,
they were not to attempt to carry reduction further by the ope-
ration of a Sinking Fund. The consequence of this reduction
of Debt was, that the annual charge upon the courary bed been
lessened by the sum of three millions.
Mr.- TIERNEY said, he did not rise for the puiliose of en-
tering into the question in dispute between the. Right Ilon.
Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) and the lion.
Member for Aberdeen, namely, the causes to which the reduc.
then of Debt was 'to be attributed, or whether any reduetion
1 had taken place. His Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume), as vas usual
with him, stated the case so clearly and perspicuously, that it
was unnecessary for him to go over the same ground. As this
was the last opportunity he should have of calling the atten.
tion of the time to this subject, he wished to avail himself of
it. lie regretted that his Honourable Friend (Mr. Bennet)'pro-
:Posed that the Bill should be read a third time that day six
months ; he should prefer that day eix weeks, that the House
might have an opportunity of considering the subject in the
present Session. HD would not have it supposed that lie op-
posed the principle of a Sinking Fund ; he would always sup-
port a Sinking 1' of real surplus, when the circumstances of
the country were such es to admit of its being advantageously
employed. Ile opposed this Bill, becanse lie thought more good
would be done by a repeal of taxes. The question he wished
now to consider was, whether they had a real surplus of five mil-
lions or three millions. He implored the liouee to consider whe.
tiler by the operation agreed upon' last Session with respect
to the half pay and pensions, two millions could be obtained ap.
plicable to the reduction of the debt. lie contended that the
real surlus was three millions, and no more. If he understood
the explanation of the Right lion. Gentleman (the Chancellor
of' the .Exchiquer), it was this--that by the proposed plan two
millions of income now payable in pensions and half- pay would
be left untouched, and might iherefore be dispo,sed of in the re•
duction of debt. Ile did not-see in what way the public was to
derive any benefit-from the operation. eliie view of it was this,
there was a sum-of five millions to be paid in half pay and pen-
sions to certain parties. Of this, 2,800,0001. was to be taken
from the Sinking Fund. There then 'remained a sum of
2,200,0001. for which the Right Honourable Gentleman said,
in place of paying it to the parties they were , have a ter-
imneble annolty for 45 years. This a,2oopoz. Was then to
be employed in the purchase of 3 per Cent. Perpetual Annui-
ties, but whence did the money for doing this arise, but from
the purchasers of terminable Annuities ? left them exactly
where it found them. There could be no actual reduction of
debt. Ho did not object to the principle'of easing the present
burthens of the country by throwing part of them on posterity.
It was, however, directly contrary to the principle of the Sinkitig
Fund, which was N relieve posterity by throwing the hurdler'
on themselves. Ile could comprehend thee a Gentleman with
an estate of 20001. a year might grant an annuity on it forforty-
five years with advantage to himself. It might be necessary for
him to raise money for the purpose of building or improvement,
and the estate might thus ultimately be benefited. But were he
to employ the loan in'the redemption of another debt, it tould
lead to no beneficial result. When the Measure respecting the
half-pay and pensions passed last year, it was adopted without
any reference to the. Sinking Fund. All he wished was, that
the actual surplus should be estimated at no more than three
millions. Ile would advise all those lion. Gentlemenevho in-
tended voting for a Sinking
.Fund to be certain that they bad
one. All he should ask was that. Ile ehould ohly requite on.
the part of those lion. Gentlemen consistent that they should
only vote for that which could alone form a Sinking Fund—the
surplus of revenue beyond expenditure. Hp was convinced the
only relief that could be afforded to the distresses of the agri-
culturist watt a reduction of taxation, and he should call upon
all those lion. Gentlemen who had been presenting petitions
from that class (the agriculturists), to vote only for that Sink-
ing Fund which really had existence. Should the Bill pass in
its present state, we should have neither the advantage of the
new nor the old' system. But he would .not ask at that mo-
ment that two millions of taxes should be taken off, nor that
any declaration should be made respecting the manner in which
that sum should be applied ; bUt merely that we should have a
Sinking Fund of three millions, and that afterwards we might
consider how the other 2,000,000/. should be disposed of—for,
however anxiouswas t
lie
o reduce_ the buithen of taxation, yet
did he feel that he could not conscientiously vote- or the nuns-
sion of taxation after that Bill should be passed into a law.
Ile, therefore, asked of Hon. Gentlemen to vote only for that
which they understood. It was evidently impossible for the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to do that which lie proposett
The moment that Bill should Pasit for the maintenance of a
Sinking Fund of 5,000,000/, it became a law, end must conse.
quently be supported, which would preclude all possibility of
leather reducing the taxation. lie lied na hesitation to vote
for the proposition of his lion. Friend—should it be carried,
and the Bill consequently thrown out, the old law would re-
main, under which the available surplus would Le applied in
the same manner as it had been for the last four or five years.
He' would not trouble the House with any further observetion,
but should vote for the proposition of his lion. Friend.
Mr. HUSRISSON felt extreme satisfaction et hearing Hon.
Gentlemen at both sides of the House at length express them-
eelves friendly to the principle of a Sinking Fupd. lie bad
heard with great satisfaction from'his Right Hon. Friend who
spoke last but one that he had returned to the prineipleed the
Sinking Fund. His Hon. Friend, the Member for Porterling.
ton, also seemed to have come round a little to the same Opinion,
for lie had expressed, a desire to see a real Sinking Fund. esta-
blished in the country. The great objection of thetelion. Gent.
to a Sinking Fund was, that it might be diverted from he proper
object—the reduction of the National Debt; but it ought to be
recollected, that the Sinking Fund could not beditspoat.sd of in any
manner without the concurrence of Parliament, and to that which
the wisdom of Parliament directed he thoughtno objection could
be taken. His Hon. Friend seemed disposed to adapt the plan of
the Hon. Bart. the Member for Queen's County. It appeared
to him that all agreed that in order to be safe we ought to have
some surplus, and that surplus., whether its amount should be
large or small, ought to be applied to the reduction of the Public
Debt. Were we not to act thus we 'should, be at the end of our
resources very soon indeed, and without the power to call upon
the Public for loans in the event of any future emergency. A
Sinking ,Fund was absolutely necessary unlees a country wanted
to proclaim its inability to pay ; and this country beyond any
other has owed its greatness to the maintenance elite public
credit.—(Hear, hear !),-He agreed with his Hon. Friend -that
the present real surplus was three millions sterling indeed he
had never advanced any thing contrary to that. Bejaia° agreed
with his lion. Friend that the other two millions were not a
surplus, but an appropriation. of a portion of our revenue to
that purpose. Bee the arrangement proposed for the paying
ofd'five millions of Life Annuities by a substitution of an an.
flinty of 2,000,0001, per tum. for 44 yews, a sum of 2,800,0001.
per annum becaMe dieposablee Instead of applying that hest..
mentioned sum to the support of the Sinking Fund, it had
been directed to the reduction of taxation. The object Of the'
Hon. Bart. (Sir Ile.nry Parnell) was to convert a permanent
charge into terminable annuities; but that was neteantveratieat

PRICE. SIX.EN Pr.NTI74

' similar to that of which he (Mr. Iluxkieson) .had just spoittn.
The reeult of the plan edepted last year. wain 'thin we
sum of five millions to apply to the reduction Of the National
Debt, namely--three millions derived • from • the surplus' re-
Venue, anti two millions from the sale of life atinuitien for
years.---(litetr I)—llitt Hon. Friend, the Membertig Portal-Wig-
ton, asked, " Why are you not satisfied to take that turn when
the life annuities should fall in ?" lie (Mr. Huskiseon).wOuld
reply, " because It is an advantage to have. it-in the way 'tton•
temlated." , The discovery of the lion. Barotiet,,the Rimierfig the Mitten'. County, and of which his Ilk. 1 lueltissanle)
lion. Friend, the 'Member for Portedington, itellled SO math
enamoured, would, insteed of relieving the country, tiddloPee
burthens; for if We were to give terminable instead minx-
cent annuities, we should tie up the surplus of re.ecriue;,entl
thereby render further reduction of taxation impraetleable. He
would contend, that we had wisely determined the turibunt that
should be npplieable to the reduction of our deti beeaute,
Were we not to detenuioe upon a certain sum, it would be utterly
impossible for us to act upon any fixed principle.' lle repeated
his sitiefaction that, wine respect to a Sinkieg Fund, lion.
Gentielnen at both _sides of the House had come to an Under-
standing. Ile (Mr. llusititAson) admitted diet there was a Sink-
ing Fund of three millions only--(Cheers item the OpPosl-
. thin side' of the Houszn—and that the other two minione
.'were -merely a different application of a pertion of our in;
come. Helene, glad also that, we had at length ereived at an
understanding that a Sinking Fund of one per Cent upon, One
Debt should be crewed for its extinction ; and 100 was thereon,
opposed to ~the assertion of his lion. Friend, then Member tot
Portarlington, that ea Sinking Fund ought to he kept up, as it
only thorned a fund upon which the Chancellor of the Et-
chequer for the time being lay hie him& in any.
emergency. The last war in which this country bad been en,
gageti was a wer 'of five-anti-twenty years continuance—it
was a war of such a protracted duration, and of sigh a na..
tura as could never again be anticipated ; there was, therefore,
little or no probability that our future necessities should he
such as to compel us to break in on the principle of the Sinking
Fund of .1792; and he-hoped, should we be Naito obliged' to
borrow money, that a Sinking .Fund, of the same nature and
amount as that recognized in. 179«, should be established for
the 'absorption of such new loarnee(flear, beer !)—The motion
before, the. House was, that the Bill be read a third time that
day six months: were that motion carried, the old Sinking
Fund, with all its machinery, would go on, and we should have
consequently to apply, in the reduction of the Debt, between
the fish April and kit July, no less a sum than thur millions ;
we must therefore be under the necessity of borrowing money
for that purpose ; for no surplus, to that uniount, could by any
Possibility accrue...,. that is, we should be comeelled to go on
botrowing in order to keep up the Sinking Fund. Ilan.Gentleman said, 'if the Bill were thrown out, there would be a
surplus sufficiently applicable to the reduction of the debt.
That assertion he (Mr. iluskisson) could contradict. Govern.'
ment had, by the late plan, been enabled to reduce the puhlie'
incilmbrances by two millions, leaving a eimilar sum applicable
tit the reduction of the debt. From the lion. Ilaronet's propte.
eition no such advantages could possibly False ; for, in the
operation proposed by hint of turning permanent into tenni-
riable Annuines, the holders should have some inducement ter
consenting to such exchange, which would preclude every e
pectation whatever of a surplus; and consequently tie power
to reduce taxatione—tHear, heenhear !) •
lord A. HAMILTON congratulated the .House upon the
admission of the Bight Hon. Gentlemen that there were but
three millions of surplus existing, and yet with that sum lie
would support a Bill for maintaining infeinking Fund of tire
millione, well aware that the remaining two millions were not a
surplus.. The light lion. Gentleman presumed throughtntt.
the whole of his, :speech, that whatever should be now thine
would be applied solely to the establishment of a real Sinking
Fund, and one not likely to be treated in the manner in which
the Sinking Fund had been dealt with by former Parliaments
anti former illiniaters. Could the Right ion. Gentlenian dis-
pute that there had been so taken from the Sinking Fund 1390
millions ? Could he dispute further that since the year 1819
there has been a surplus revenue of nine millione, and that since
the same year (1919) there had been no reduction of the debt
effected by it? If die Bight Hon. Gentleman (the ChaneellOr
or
the Exchequer) admitted that there had been a reduction of the
public debt, and that he admitted alga that such reduction had
not been effected by the Sinking Fund, no argument could be
deduced from those admissions in favour of the Bill before the
House. Even'the Right Hort. tient. who spoke • lest admitted
that, in his opinion, the Sinking Fund wile none the weree for
having been oe:.asionally directed to other purposes than those'
for which it had been crented--he had also represented the ;dee
of the lion.,Baronet, the Member for the (Neen's County, at;
inconsistent in prineiple with that intoptNi last seer by the
House, and more likely to produce mischief tten benefit in the
County: Ile (Lord A. 11.) would not ens that to apportion
3 millions only to the maintenance of the ainkirgalind, and
apply the .remaining 2 millions to the reduction of tasuitiOni
wield be the best rineutare ; but it was infinitely preferable to that interned by the Right Honourable Gentleman opmuite.—
Ile thought it hard thet the Right :Honourable tientktiirm and the Chancellor of the Exchequer should exeltiim —" see
what, a serape we shall be all in unless yea pars. this Bill !"
and found thereon an argument in support (Wan imperfect Bill; He thought such, was rather all Ifllair mode of iin'enneno—
When the Bill was offered die other night, he beilexpreited '
his determination to oppose it, and he founded • that determfn.e '
ation on the conviction, that whatever proposal should be made,
for reduction of taxation, after that Bill should have passed, .;
could not be consistently supported; fig to a certain extent it
tied up the hands of Parliament front a further reniisSion 'of' •
taxes. lie had hoped that all those lion. Menthols who huti
presented petitions to that House complaining. of agricultural '
distress, would have attended to that Bill, for it was well
worthy their attention.

Mr. CURING thought that the discussion which the sub.) ect
had. undergone wottld be productive of much good, becauae it
would bring all parties and the public to a better undoratanding
of its merits. It was admitted now, on all hands, that the real
amount of Sinking Fund was only three millions. After Snell
an acknowledgment from. the Right Hon. Gentleman opposif,ci
it was the most clumsy contrivance that he had ever heard di;
to call upon the House to piss a Bill, declaring that there wn't
a Sinking Fund of live millions. This was the most strange, way
possible, of meeting the doctrines of those who 'said there ought
to be no Sinking und. Instead of declaring what its amount
really was, in order to conciliate those who demand a reductitat
of taxation to the fullest possible extent, they were to tell thtni
that the Revenue was two millions snore than its aettial amount.
The Right lion. Chancellor of the Exchequer bad congratulated
himself upon hawing fotind new relations in that Hoene. .IJor
his own part he should always be glad to support any measnre'
for the good of the country, lot it come from what able it may.
But he would remind the Right lion. Gentleman of anett:rr
relation which he had in that—House, and one from which the
sooner he was divorced the better*-namely, the sykem of Hs
predecessor, the late Chanteller of the Exchequer.—l
hear 1)--.110 had left a child at the Right Hon. Gentleman's
door turd the Helm would be wine to make ell possible haste
in throwing the basket into the river. It was now af,reeti on'
the other side that the amount of our Sinking 'Fund was three
, millions ; andit had been admitted by his Right Hon. Friend
' below hint (Mr: Tierney), that some Surplus was necessary. • •
To those who held the same opinion he would confidently
dresahinutelf, and ask whether with our large expermitnre
snail an meant was too much for the maintenance of pia,*
'credit. The Hon. Member then argued against the sale of ti.*' •
Military pensions, and said he would defy any person to 40/
that the least poasible advantage could be derived front it. .116
felt some difficulty how to act with regard to the B.qh -BO did
not see the use of putting it off for fire or' six weeks .tet, had'.
been suggested. The sooner our finances were pot upon. fie6.l '
and pernianetst footing the better. Yet, he did not know 'tow, •
to get rid of the objectionable parts. If the first atnentlittene
were negatived, he shotihl move another for the insertion of the
words, three millions instead of'five.< it regard to the Pen-
aims Loans, .be wished the Right Hon. Chancellor of the Cs-
chequer would exercise the same candour as that which marked
all his measures with this ono exception. Either let him de-
fend it and adopt -the' child, or give it up altogether. The That.
Member mom! an Amendment to the effifthe hail ittittett. •
IHlSKlSSON'explaintl that he danot city therc were;
only three millions applicable to the extinction of debt, but 'the;
there were only three- millions of surplus in'ahtt- ,Excheeptqf
arising out of the taxes. But be stated that if tho A wield/a
were sold, -there would be two. rn Minns More appfleablo to the
debt, because they were selling a smaller a-mounta Annuities
for a larger:
Sir H. PARNELL said that if they wished to raise money by
loan, the plan of the Right Hon. Ovntkibun -would' he the brat
for that purpose. Rut he contended that nothing could be
more absurd than to borrow awe" its that way for paying ,off
debt which had been incurred tiyi the very itameayate.m of loans.M r. RICARDO thought there was a great difit.rtatee

-:

'"--7P

tween the two plans. The plan of the Right non. GentleMen'
opposite 'was the changing of a life annuity into one for forty.
live years. He would ask thellight Hon. Gentleman, 'had not
the act for such alteration passed, would that Right lion. Gen-.
tleman have thought of stating the surplus at more than•three
millions ? An Ace of Parliament could not make a surplus'
where no surplus existed. ('His Hon.,Friend (Mr. Baring) had'
remarked upon the plan of his (Mr.. Ricardo's) Hon. Friend, the.
Meinher for the Queen's County, and was favourable to that:
plan, as far as related to the five per cents., but not as extend-
ing to the 3 per cents., because.lthe holders could not be com.:
{polled to acquiesce hilt. But his Han. Friena(Sir IT. Parnell)
did not demand its enforcement; be only proposed that it should
be tried. They did not want grounds for estimating the probable,
event of that plan, for the House would recollect that there were
then Long Annuities in the market, of,which 37 years remained
unexpired. Taking them at four per cent. at.l9 years pur.
clease, they would be worth 76 or 76. If Ministers, therefore,
could go to Market to sell the Four per Cent. Annuities at 37
years for 76, they might buy 100/. Three per Cents. at less
thaw 78. He had one more remark to make upon the statement
made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer respecting the dif-
ferences in the amount of the debt at the present moment, and
the year 1816. • The Right Hon. Gentleman had contended
that the'debt had been diminished 24 millions, and he was
sure the House had been led to suppose that that reduction had
been effected by the operation of the Sinking Fund. He would
beg lea've to say, that it haul evidently not been so. Had there
,been really any reduction ? He thought that there had not.—
The had been turning the Three per Cents. into Fives, and
Five per Cents. into Pour peeCente. But the effect of that
• iiritd been to diminish the amount of capital, without at all
diminishing the amount of charge. The amount of charge got
ri4 of was ve trifling indeed. should support the amend.
tn • .ent of the lion. Member; for he was of opinion, that there
would be no falling off in the Revenue; and if there was, he
sure that the people would submit toll rate of taxation that
would cover the deficiency.
Mr. ELLICE said, that the Bill involved so many principles
'foul so many contradiction's, that he was at a loss how to vote.--
Ile agreed with the lion. Member, the Treasurer of the Navy,
in thinking that the Bill would' at least be productive of good in
Putting an end to the machinery of the old Sinking Fund, and
therefore lie did not see how he could consistently with that
opinion vote for the entire rejection of the Bill. At the same
tune, having voted for the motion of the lion. Gent. below him
fora public reduction of 2,000,000 of taxation, and against
carrying on the delusion of last Session, he would express his
hope that. Parliament would not concur iu supporting that de-
tision. If a contract were' entered into with the Bank for the
sale of Annuities, the Ban': would make an advantageous con-
tract, especially if peace were preserved. He thought with the
Honourable Member for Knareshomugh that it might be ad.
visable to alter the proposed amendment from six months to six
weeks ; and he would support any motion that might be roads
to that effect.

, .
Mr. TIERNEY explained.
The House then divided on Mr. (1. Rennet's amendment.:—:.
Ayes - - . . - - - ' '•59
Noes . - - - - 109. '''

Majority against the amendment -
A second division took place on Mr. Baring's amendment:---
Ayes - 72
Noes - - 100
Majority against the amendment -
Ppon our return to the House, we found
Mr. JONES supporting the vote which be had given but
the noise occasioned by the admission of strangers to the Gal-
lery was so great that we were not able to collect the Hon.
Member's observations.