The Sun.
London, England, 1848-03-28 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING,

to its present state, that we should have been spared
this, discussion.—(lfear, hear.) However, I et-3
hodthat this debate affords the an opportunity to rebtt•
he accusation of the Hon. Member for Montrose, that
the Government have not paid any attention to this
lUbject, or otherwise they would not reject a modified
e of taxation. Now I am quite prepared to admit
'at at the first blush the proposition of a modifier;
a!de of taxation bears a very plausible appearance.
Gat so far from its being the fact that I have not consi-
dered the subject with the gravest attention, I must as•
14re the House that the deeper I went into it, the more
rpossible did I find it to make any material alteration
from the present system, without making it more
Nast, more inquisitorial, and more objectionable
than it is at the present time. The Honourable
(ember for Montrose referred to the period of 1806,
*hen this tax was proposed by Mr. La,
Perhaps the Honourable Gentleman is not aware of its
history. It was first proposed by Mr. Pitt as a tax upon'
expenditure, then as a tax upon realised property, and
then as a tax upon income. Exemptions were made in
favour of different classes. Men having large families,
er other burdens, were exempted ; but it was found that
ell these exemptions led to so much fraud that it was put
,
its present shape, in which it has been continued 133
Lord Lansdowne, Mr. Addison, and Mr. Percival. It was
to proposed by the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member
for Tamworth in 1842, who stated to the House his belief
that the most equitable and just state in which it could
be imposed was that in which it at present stands. lam
tot prepared to deny that there are not inequalities in
the system; but I do believe that it it is imposed, it must
be imposed in this shape; and that if the people are pre-
Pared to adopt it, in order to enable the Government to
relieve the country from more objectionable taxes, this
Way is the only one in which they ought to do so, and
therefore the only one to which I can give my consent.—
(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hume) has re-
ferred to the system of the Hon. Member for Cocker-
mouth (Mr. foreman). Now I know it is a difficult
thing to bring forward a plan not open to some objec-
tion and I look upon it as a very great argument iu
favour of the present plan that it has been the cue
alwa3s adopted heretofore by Parliament when they
desired to impose an income-tax, and one against which
but few objections can be urged which arc not equally
applicable to all others which can be devised. But the
llon. Member for Coelcermouth brings down his plan,
and notwithstanding its having had the advantage of
his mature consideration, his able statement, and his
lucid and masterly explanation, the objections to it are
so great that the Right Hon. Member for the University
of Cambridge was enabled to point out three or four
Which were fatal to its success. Surely it is not an
unfair inference to draw, when I say that the failure of
the Member for Cockermouth shows that it is not quite
so easy a matter to find out another plan less objection-
able than the present. I stated to the House that another
country has adopted this system; it is adopted in one
of the United States of America, where it can-
not be said there is any great feeling in favour of
the landed interests. There it is imposed upon
all profits on incomes wising from professions, or any
trade, occupation, or employment, upon all law costs,
and the costs of suits, as far as lam aware. Sir, there
is no country where an income-tax has been proposed
otherwise than as an equal rate upon all income, without
distinction of the sources from whence it is derived. I
find a strong argument in favour of this tax in the con-
duct of the Hon. Member for Montrose himself. When,
in 1845, a renewal of this tax was proposed for three
years, Mr. Roebuck made a motion for the exclusion of
professional incomes, in order to subject them to a lower
rate of taxation, the Hon. Member for Montrose objected
to that. Then came the motion of the Hon. Gentleman
the Member for Liskeard, which was very similar to the
present. The Hon. Member for Montrose opposed that
also, and not only opposed it, but spoke egainst it. He
said, " He for one would not allow of the alteration; if
the improvements which bad been suggested were
impossible, why then let them not bother their heads
about it."—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Now, I
pray that he will follow this advice. Do not let him
bother us; let him give us the benefit of his support;
let him vote for this measure, as the alternative of many
other taxes which have been taken ',off. Now, I will
state some two or three reasons which induce me to be-
lieve that it is not possible to modify this tax to meet
the views of the Hon. Gentleman. I will not go into
the question whether income on capital should be taxed.
But, according to the plan of the Hon. Gentleman, the
process of being examined by an assurance company into
the amount of your capital, and by the officer of the
company into the state of your health, should be gone
through every year of your life before you could arrive
at his proposal of capitalizing by income. The chances
of the duration of your life would vary, and thus the ne-
cessity of being surveyed, as they termed it in the navy,
was rendered imperative ; and this was applicable to all
persons possessed of life estates.—(Hear, hear.) I will
not now repeat the arguments through which I have
endeavoured to convince the House that, as a matter of
good faith to the fundholder, it is but just to tax all
incomes at an equal rate ; neither will I go into the
question which has been referred to upon a former
occasion, and the sum of which has been ably stated in a
letter which I hold in my hand, from a clergyman in
Suffolk, complaining of the oppressions inflicted upon the
landholder under schedule A. He states, upon a rent
charge of 4501., the poor-rates and other assessed taxes
amount to 104/. And he complains that all the local
taxation of the country is paid by persons classed under
schedule A. Schedules C and E are not rateable.
Schedule D is exempted by an annual Act, and conse-
quently upon schedules A and B falls the great burden
of taxation. Take the case of two gentlemen, each pay-
ing an income-tax of 301., and each enjoying an income
of 1,000/. a year, one from professional, and one from
landed estate; there was no reduction made for repairs
—no reduction for the expenditure—the income-tax
was paid perfectly irrespective whether the tenant paid
his rent or not, and to such an extent was this system
carried, that where land had remained unoccupied,
the income-tax was paid by the incoming tenant. I
should like to know what return the landlord classes
would put upon their expenditure upon their estates.
I have heard it stated at about ten per cent., and by
others I have heard it put as high as thirty per cent. As
far as my experience goes I have not the least doubt
that it would be as high as twenty per cent. Under
schedule D the tradesman is entitled to make a reduc-
tion for all repairs, and a very liberal allowance is made
for them. Now I freely admit that a higher per centage
ought to be paid upon realised property than upon pro-
fessional income, but if such is done, is it not quite clear
that those paying under schedule A would have a right
to demand that those under D should pay the full rate,
without any deductions, in the same manner as those
who were rated under schedule A were compelled to pay?
This is a point of view in which I think Hon. Gentlemen
ought to consider the subject. Ido not think that any
person looking at these returns will consider that schedule
D bears any proportion to the amount of the professional
income of the country. It appears, under this return,
that in the whole of Great Britain there are only
111,000 persons who receive 1501. per annum. Does
any body believe that there are not more than 111,000?
—(Hear.) Does any person believe„ that there is not
even in this great metropolis a greater number? Why
I remember hearing one gentleman say that he knew an
establishment in the City where there were seventy
clerks, who were each receiving the sum of 1501. a year.
If gentlemen would take the trouble of examining a little
farther they would find that according to these returns
only nine thousand persons were deriving from trade an
income only of 1,000/. a year. Does anybody believe it?
—(Hear, hear.) It is said that this tax presses very
hardly upon the small traders. The whole number of
persons paying under schedule D is sixteen hundred
thousand, the whole amount they pay is seven hundred
and fifty thousand pounds; and the whole amount paid
by the nine thousand persons deriving 1,0001. a year is
776,000/. This appears to me, to the complaints of
those who say they are overburdened and overtaxed, a
complete answer, that if these inequalities are removed—
if one class is made to pay fairly with the other—you will
have to render the tax more inquisitorial, and I do not
think by doing so you will render it more palatable. If you
remove these inequalities you will render this tax inqui-
sitorial to such a degree that the people of the country
would not stand it for a year.—(Hear, hear.) I am
very anxious that the tax upon schedule D should be
levied lightly. I think that it is quite fair that it should
be so. The great objection to this tax is its inquisi-
torial nature. Now, Sir, you may attempt to make it
more just, but by doing so you will make it more in-
quisitorial; and by making it more inquisitorial you will
make it more odious. I have heard of no plan, and I
can devise no plan, by which it can be levied in a more
equitable manner than at present. When I opposed it
in the first instance I stated what were the conditions
upon which I would support it. I said that if the corn
duty, the sugar duty, and the timber duty were removed,
that then I would vote for it; so I do not think I am in-
consistent in the course which I have adopted. Sir, the
doctrines of Adam Smith have been quoted, but the
gentlemen who have done so have quite forgotten to
read one sentence succeeding that which they did read,
which entirely alters the view which the first would
appear to convey. I;remember the Right Honourable
Member for Tamworth saying, that in his opinion this
tax was more consistent with the four canons laid down
by Adam Smith than any other, one of which is, that
a man ought to contribute something according to his
ability. But I will read the words of Adam Smith.
He says, '8 Thelsubjects of every state ought to contri-
bute to the support of the state in proportion to their
strength and ability."—(Hear, hear.) Yes, there they
stop ; but let me read the next sentence :—" that is in
proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy
under the protection of the state."—(Hear, hear.) Now
the property of landed gentlemen is every bit as safe as
is the property of those persons who have embarked it
in trade. Sir, upon a careful consideration of the sub-
ject, I have come to the conclusion, that whether you
take the classes individually or together, you will find
that no injustice: done to persons paying under schedule
D, will not be increased by modifying the scale of taxa-
tion.—(Hear, hear.) For these reasons I must object
to the motion of my Hon. Friend, or to any other mo-
tion that has for its object the alteration of the scale.
Mr. J. CLAY was anxious to explain why upon this
subject he had already voted, and why he should again
vote, in opposition to an Administration in whose gene
rat policy he concurred. He had great confidsnico in the
present Ministry, particularly with regard to the foreign
department; but if there was a point on which they
were very generally distrusted, it was in matters of
finance, retrenchment, and commercial government.—
(Hear, hear.) Ile was convinced, however, that the
country was determined to have a complete revision of
the public expenditure, and that that revision could
not be long delayed. As a general principle he was in
favour of direct taxation, and ho thought that a tax of
the kind they were discussing ought to be made perma-
nent. His objection referred to the form of the pre-
sent imposition—to its inequalities, and its injustice.
—(Hear, hear.) Much had, no doubt, been said of
the difficulties in the way of calculating the due pro-
portions which people of different amounts of income

ought to pay. But after all, it was a mere matter of
calculation, and as such ho did not eec now it could v,re
even a formidahle, much lens an insuperable, dilli-
culty.—(llear.) Because everything could not be done,
he Right Hon. Ga nileinan the Chancellor of the Ex•
ch, Tier certainly had not proved that nothing ought to
tempted—(Hoar)—while, for his own part, he was
oonvinced that were the country to see an honest endea-
vour to smooth away the grossest inequalities, and to
redress the most glaring injustices, it would be amply
satisfied. The Right non. Gentleman bad expressed
his astonishment at the small sum yiel led by schedule
I). and he had thrown out insinuations that that portion
of the tax was dishonestly withheld. Such might be the
case, but if so, it was the fault of the machinery in use.
Let the pressure of schedule I) be fairly and equitably
adjusted, and the country would not object to any inqui
,ition necessary to secure honesty in the pa) ment.—
(Hear.) It was upon the middle classes that the inequa-
lity of the tax principally fell; but this country was
essentially a middle-class country—with some destitution
at one end of the scale, and some overgrown and gigantic
fortunes at the other; the great mass of the population
belonged to a middle class. Nov God forbid that he
should advocate class legislation in the usual sense of
.he term; but surely, if the legislation was to be in the
hands of any one class, justice would delight to see it in
the hands of those who were to the general body of the
population as a thousand to one, rather than in that of
others who were to society in general but one to a thou•
sand. It was his conviction, however, that the present
tax must, sooner or later, be altered. As it existed at
present it could not last long. IR, therefore, in the
name of his constituents, directed an earnest and anxious
appeal to the Noble Lord at the head of the Govern-
ment yet again to take into consideration whether some-
thing might not be done to alter that inequality, and to
redress that injustice of which the country complained,
and of the satisfactory adjustment of which the country
believed, and he believed, the possibility.—(Hear.)
Mr. TRELAWNY would vote against the motion of
the Honourable Gentleman the Member for Montrose.
He believed that the pressure of the income-tax,
whether just or unjust, was analogous to that of all
kinds of taxation. The Honourable Member for the
West Riding of Yorkshire had shown the House how
disproportionately heavy was the share of customs and
excise duties which fell upon the poor compared to the
rich man, and the income-tax went upon the same prin-
ciple. If it was a wrong one, then let there be a general
revision of taxation.—(Hear, hear.) Ile held, however,
that under present circumstances, and in the present
state of the public mind, it would not be advisable to re-
mit this tax, but to continue to exact it, at least until a
fair trial had been given to the late commercial measures
of relaxation.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD said that no oppo-
nent of the income-tax had made out so strong a case
against it as had the Right Honourable Gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer himself.—(Hear, hear.)
That Right Honourable Gentleman had proved that in
every way schedule D was loaded with injustice. He
would, therefore, urge the Honourable Member for
Montrose not to give evi n that sanction to the mea-
sure which was implied in his motion, but to divide upon
the main question, and to refuse to go into Committee at
all.—(hear, hear.)
Mr. J. BONIIAM CARTER would oppose the
motion of the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Mon-

trose. The country, in opposing the tax, was
hardly aware of the difficulties of the Government, and
at the same time took an exaggerated view of the in-
justice and inequality of the impost ; but, at any rate,
whatever might be the opinion of the country, this was
not the proper time to refer to a Select Committee a tax
which was absolutely needful for the preservation of the
public credit. They all knew how Committees upon such
subjects were managed. No one could say when such a
tribunal would agree to a report, or whether they would
agree to one at all. He thought that reference had been
too freely made to extreme cases as showing the injus-
tice and inequality of the tax, and under all the cir-
cumstances of the case he should not consider that he
was justified in supporting the motion of the Honourable
Gentleman.
Mr. URQUHART said he had paid great attention to
this question, and, after much anxious consideration,
was persuaded that the course pursued by the House on
matters of finance was not wise or proper. It was one
of the gravest questions which the House could consider
whether they should adopt direct or indirect taxation,
or a general principle. At present they were but making
an experiment, but so far from applying themselves to
the main point at issue, they had suffer ed themselves to
be led into details which could but little affect it, and
had not gone the right way to get a solution of their
difficulties. He was firmly convinced that it would be
most vexatious and unwise to heap up one system on
the back of another system. Instead of discussing the
course they should pursue, and of determining whether
they should abandon the old or adopt the new system,
the House had mixed up in that debate a number of
subjects, such as the national defences, the inequality
of the opration of the income-tax, and the relaxation
of duties, which had nothing to do with the real
merits of the question, and in so doing had not, he sub-
mitted, taken the proper means for examining into them,
He should certainly support the proposition of the
Honourable Member for Montrose, not because it
answered all the objects which he should like to see
attained, or was likely in any degree to cure the disorder
into which our financial system had fallen, but because
it would moot the whole question in and out of the
House. The Honourable Member for Hull, in ridiculing
the principles of direct taxation, had alluded to `Vat
Tyler and the poll.tax ; but the Honourable Member
did not seem to be aware that he arid Nat Tyler used
the very same arguments, and that the objection which
existed to that tax related rather to the agency by which
it was collected than to the principle on which it was
founded. If the House meant to meet the question
fairly, they must do away with that system of centrali-
zation which was now crushing them—they must look
more to the adoption of local Government, and then
they would bo free from the weight of business,
to which they were unequal, and would be able to
apply themselves to the reform of the whole financial
position. If any one moment could be propitious for
such measures it would be the present, when events
were every day occurring in foreign countries which
showed that the people were determined not to submit
to centralization, and that where it was established it
was destroyed. He was convinced that direct could not
be introduced on the back of indirect taxation, and that
they must look to the support of municipal and popular
bodies to carry out the former as that which was best
suited to this country.
Mr. MITCHELL said that the very reasons advanced
by the Honourable Gentleman against the measure were
those which induced him to support it. The argument
used by the Honourable Member for Tavistock in sup-
port of the tax was the argument used by `Vat Tyler
against the poll tax, and the statement of the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer that
the income-tax was much evaded at present would lead
him (Mr. Mitchell) to vote against it.—(Hear, hear.)
He had never heard such an argument in his life for
the perpetuation of a tax as the fact that many per-
sons did not pay it who ought to do so; and he
thought the Right Honourable Gentleman should in-
troduce a measure to press the payment alike
on all those who wore liable to it. Although he would
be much affected by the inquisitorial operation of the
tax, he would prefer to endure all its consequences
rather than those should escape who were equally bound
with him to pay it. The operation of the tax as it stood
at present was singularly unjust; and he was persuaded,
even from the arguments of the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, that it should be restricted to incomes of 5001.
a-year. It was unfair to tax the tradesman and the pro-
fessional man in the same proportion; because the in-
comes of the latter depended on their health, whereas
those of the former were not much affected by illness or
a fit of sickness. He had been excessively disappointed
with the course taken by the Government in respect to
this question. Although so many years a member of
that House, he could never be accused of offering a fac-
tious opposition to any measure; but in the present
case, he believed a gross injustice had been done to
those in schedule D. The impression on men's minds out
of doors, he could assure the House, was that the Go-
vernment would not bring in any measure which they
did not think would have the approbation of the Right
Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth (Sir R. Peel),
who had been consulted on this tax, proposed and car-
ried by him at a time when he had a large majority of
the landlord classes with him. The Right Hon. Baronet
was pledged to the tax. and therefore the Government,
it :,was supposed, did not think themselves justified in
abandoning it. The people out of doors thought there
were two parties—the gentlemen on the Treasury bench,
and the gentlemen who followed the Right Hon.
Baronet, who settled between them the measures which
were to be brought forward, and did not give any other
pereons the chance of doing anything else but agreeing
with them.
Mr. NEWDEGATE (amid cries for a division) pro•
ceeded to say that it had not been his intention to speak
on the question, but that having listened attentively to
the arguments which had been used against the pro-
position of Government, he thought Hon. Members
bad completely contradicted each other's arguments.
The Hon. Member for Montrose objected to the tax
because it was under the direction of Commis-
sioners appointed by the nation, who might be
supposed to have some interest in its operation ; but
he could not suppose this would have much weight
with the House. The Chancellor of the Exchequer ad-
mitted that every landlord was taxed on 20 per cent.
more than he received, on account of the outlay to
which he was subject; but the Right Hon. Gentleman
had proposed no feasible plan for remedying this injus-
tice. He wished the House to observe that men of
every shade of opinion and representatives of every in-
terest, with the sole exception of the landlords, had
objected to this tax, while they were the most heavily
burdened and had to pay the largest share of the tax.
What conclusion could be drawn from the opposition to
this measure, so varied as it was, but that direct taxa-
tion was so invidious in its operation, that it would be
always liable to complaints of injustice? They might
say no form of taxation could be perfectly just, but had
any tax ever been met with such arguments as this, into
which they had been forced by the difficulties of the
Exchequer?—(Divide, divide.) In voting for this tax
for three years, ho begged to protest against its being
supposed that he supported it as a permanent measure;
and he thought that if Government acted rightly, they
would give no shadow of a reason for thinking they
looked upon it in such a light.—(Divide, divide.?
Mr. HORSMAN (who was received with some impa-
tience for a few minutes) said he was disposed to agree
with those who could not see any practical object in the
proposition of the Hon. Member for Montrose. The
question was one which the House had already decided
hear)—and after the deliberation they had
bestowed on that decision ho did not see much chance of
their being induced to alter it.—(Hear, hear.) His own
views as to the tax were the seine as they had ever been,
hut he could not help remarking that the Noble Lord
k(Lord J. Russell) and the Right Zion. the Chancellor of

the Exchequer had told the House they had inquired
into t.!:e ere: ation of the tax, and had come to the
convic.ion that the injustice of it could not he remedied.
—(Heir, hear.) That opinion coming from those who
had every- means of information, as well as the dis
crimination to detelmine its value, must have great
weight with him ; and although it did not alter hi
opinion, the expression of it in such a quarter would
render it presumptuous in him dogmatically to insist
on his own opinions, and to maintain that the)
alone were right. He had hitherto refrained from
addressing the House on this point ; for though
the plan he had introduced had been misre-
presented and misunderstood, he thought it more
becoming in him to show that he did not wish to change
the decision to which they had arrived. The Hon.
Member for Liverpool (Mr. Cardwell) had published a '
letter to his constituents, in which, referring to his (Mr.
Horsman's) plan, he stated that, after having given it
the fullest consideration, he was convinced it would
make the injustice of the income tax greater than it was.
He defied the Hon. Member to mention one class of
cases in which his plan answered the description of in-
creasing the inequality without remedying the injustice
of the tax, and he challenged him to produce, not a
multitude of instances, but one case which would make
out his statement. He was favourable to direct taxation,
and therefore he wished to see the income-tax improved,
in order that it might be made permanent. But having
already submitted a proposition for equalization to the
House, with an unsuccessful result, he was not prepared,
in the present state of the question, to offer any further
opposition to the income-tax. He thought they might
do better service to the country by applying themselves
to the great subject of the revision of the existing sys-
tem of taxation—a task for which a great and compre
hensive plan was necessary, and which could be under-
taken with effect only by the Government. He hoped
that Ministers would address themselves to it, with a
view to accomplish a settlement of the question in the
course of the next two or three years; and if they did
so, he believed they might reckon with confidence on the
co-operation of the House.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. CARDWELL had felt rather surprised at the
formal challenge addressed to him by the Honourable
Member for Cockermouth. It would be in the recollec-
tion of the House that he had pointed out two griev-
ances as arising under the plan proposed by the
Honourable Gentleman. That plan would tax an in
come, not according to the interest which the individual
might have in it, but according to the sources from
which it arose; if the source were in its nature per-
manent, then the individual was to pay the higher rate
of duty. He went on to show that the source might be
permanent, and the interest of the individual terminable
and fleeting; and he asked the House to say whether
this consequence would be just, that a widow might
have a small annuity of 1501. secured on land or perma-
nent sources—a fleeting annuity, of which, if she were to
leave anything at her death, she would be compelled to
make an annual saving; and yet, according to the scheme
of the Hon. Gentleman, she would be taxed at the higher
rate.

Mr. HORSMAN—Certainly not.
Mr. CARDWELL—Were they to be condemned i
they refused to adopt a plan which would have that
effect, at the suggestion of the Hon. Member, who did
not perceive that that would be the consequence?—
(Cheers.) lie said that if they were to ascertain by any
conceivable rule what that widow would have to pay,
they must have a public inspector to account with the
widow personally as to the nature of her income; and
he said that this would add immeasurably to the ex-
pense of the plan. He then took the case of a trader
trading on borrowed capital, who would be taxed at the
rate of 6d., whilst realised property was to:pay Bd. in
the pound. Now both paid at the same rate, and the
trader was not called upon to make any official return
of his circumstances; but if this difference were to be
established, there must be a full disclosure and accurate
statement to the Government.—(Hear, hear.) The
Hon. Member could not be more desirous than he was
that taxation should be levied in the mode by which it
would fall most fairly, and with least pressure, on the
tax-payer.
Mr. HORSMAN said a more complete misunderstand-
ing of what ho had stated could not be imagined, than
that into which the lion. Gentleman had fallen. The
Hon. Gentleman said he proposed to tax an annuitant at
the higher rate. That was the very case he stated that
he intended to tax at the lowest rate; and not only had
he specified this in the schedule of duties, but it was the
very case by which in his speech he illustrated the hard-
ship of the present system.
Mr. GOULBURN had not the least doubt, after the
lion. Gentleman's statement, as to what had been his
intention; but his Hon. Friend and himself, in the obser-
vations they made on his speech, addressed themselves
to what the Hon. Gentleman had stated.—(Hear, hear.)
There was no point more clear throughout the Hon.
Gentleman's speech than that schedule A would be
charged with a duty of Bd., whilst under other schedules
a lower duty could be imposed.
Mr. ANSTEY would support the motion of the Hon.
Member for Montrose.
The House then divided—
For the amendment 73
Against it
Majority against the amendment —2ll
The House again divided on the question that the
Speaker do leave the chair—
For the motion 223
Against it
Majority --311
The House then went into Committee
On the first clause,
Major BERESFORD rose to move that the con-
tinuance of the income-tax be for two years instead of
for three. He considered that there was something pe-
culiarly unfortunate in the period of three years. Twice
the income• tax had been imposed for that period. This
was an awful triennial visitation which they were called
upon to undergo. He very much feared that the impo-
sition of the tax for so long a period as three years
would be tantamount to its perpetuation; and with this
feeling, notwithstanding that he deprecated the idea of
embarrassing the Government, he felt it to be his duty
to move that the words "two years" be substituted for
" three years."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ac-
quitted his Honoureble Friend of any intention to em-
barrass the Government, but he could not give his as-
sent to any such motion as that which had been intro-
duced by the Hon. Member. The tax would most
assuredly be required for three years, for he feared
there was but little prospect of their being able to
equalise the revenue and expenditure before that time.
The amendment was negatived without a division,
and the blank was filled up with the words " three
years." The other clauses of the Bill were then
agreed to.
The House then resumed, and the report was ordered
to be received this day. •
On the order of the day for bringing up the report of
the Committee of Supply,
Mr. BERNAL brought up the report, which was
agreed to.
The following orders were postponed:—Landlord and
Tenant (Ireland) Bill, second reading to Tuesday next;
Diplomatic Relations with the Court of Rome Bill,
second reading on Tuesday week.
The Insolvent Debtors (India) Bill was read a second
time, and ordered to be committed on Thursday.
The Borough Police Superannuation Fund Bill was
read a third time.
The Joint Stock Companies Bill—Committee, post-
poned until this day.
The LORD ADVOCATE moved the appointment of
a Select Committee on the Law of Entail (Scotland)
Amendment Bill.
Mr. OSWALD moved that the name of Mr. Ewart be
omitted, and that that of Mr. J. Stuart be sustituted.
The House divided—
For retaining Mr. Ewart's name ... 66
Against it
Majority —34
After a short discussion the names of the other Mem-
bers were agreed to.
Sir DE LACY EVANS moved for leave to bring in a
Bill to regulate the time for payment of rates and taxes
by Parliamentary electors.
The question having been put,
Mr. FORBES moved as an amendment, " That the
House do now adjourn."
The House divided—
For the adjournment l2
Against it 5l
Majority —39
On our return to the gallery we found
Mr. HUDSON complaining, that while the friends of
the Hon. Member for Salford were not in office he used
to move the adjournment of the House at twelve o'clock
every night. But since they came in he allowed any
and every sort of business to be transacted at any hour
of the night. He wished the Hon. and Gallant Member
for Westminster would explain the objects of this Bill
before he obtained leave to introduce it,
Sir G. GREY said that leave had already been given
to the Hen. and Gallant Colonel.—(Laughter.)
Mr. HUDSON did not understand that such had been
the case.
Mr. F. MACKENZIE thought that the Hon. and
Gallant Gentleman should not be allowed to harass the
House year after year with the same Bill.
Mr. OSWALD explained, and the matter was suffered
to drop.
Mr. WAKLEY moved that the petition of George
Shillibeer (presented 3d March) be printed with the
votes.

• _
Mr. THORNELY opposed the motion.
After a short discussion, the motion was negatived.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at One o'clock.

DEATH OF SIR WILLIAM GOSSETT, THE SERGEANT.
AT-ARMS.—We regret to announce that Sir
William Gosset, the Sergeant at-Arms of the
House of Commons, died at eleven o'clock yesterday
morning, at his country residence, near Woolwich.
The deceased gentleman had been indisposed some
time, and his illness was much aggravated by an
accident which happened to him some short time
since. While returning home from his official duties
he was knocked down and run over by a cab, which
broke his leg, and since then the deceased has not
been in attendance at the House of Commons more
than once or twice. _ . _

BURKE S PEERAGE AND BARONETAGE FOR 1848.
—'We are requested to state that Mr. Col,burn has this
day published Mr. Burke's " Peerage and. Baronetage
for 1848," a new edition, revised and corrected through-
out from the personal communications of iho nobility,
&c., and containing all the new creations, in: one volume
(comprising as much matter as 20 ordini try volumes)
with 1,500 engravings of arms, &c., bounfl, which can
now be had of all booksellers. Also, late ly published,
Mr. Burke's " History of the Landed Gent ry," a genea-
logical and heraldic dictionary of the um itled aristoc-
racy of England, Scotland, and Ireland, (two volumes
royal Bvo.

PAItLIAMEN TARY DIVISIONS.

From the Votes and Proceedings of the Muse of Conan,•,=.)

MONDAY, 31:iltCli 27.

LIVERPOOL, MANCHESTER, AND NEWCASTLE-
UPON-TYNE JUNCTION RAILWAY (ABANFON-
MENT OF 'FITE RAILWAY AND DISSOLUTION
OF THE COMPANY) BILL.:
Order or Second Reading read; Motion made, and Ques-
tion proposed, " That the Bill be now raad a second time :"
—Amendment proposed, to leave out the word " now," and
at the end of the Question to add the words " this day six
months:"—Question put, " That the word ' now' stand part
of the Question." The House divided:—
MAJORITY—AYES, 76.
Aglionby, M. French. F. Parker, John
Anson, Viscount Gaskell, J. M. Pugh. David
Arundel, Earl os Granger, T. C. Raphael, Alexander
Baring, Henry Guest, Sir John Rendlesham, Lord
Blake, M. J. Hall, Sir Benjamin Renton, J. C.
Bowring, Dr. Hallyburton, Lord I:leardo, J. L.
Boyle, Robert E. Hardeastle, J. A. Richards, Richard
Bruce, Lord E. Hastie, Archibald Russell, F. C.
13unbury, E. 11. Heald, James I Sanders, George
Busfeild, William Ilenea,ge, G. IL Scrope, G. P.
Childers, J. W. Herries, J. C. Seymer, Henry Ker
Clay, James Hindley, C. Smith, R. V.
Cochrane, A. Hobbouse, T. B. Smith, M Tucker
Colebrooke, Sir T. Howard, C. W. Stanley, R. J.
Colvile, C. R. Inglis, Sir It. Stansfield, W. R.
Copeland, Ald. Lemon, Sir C. Sturt, Henry G.
Dcedes, W. Lushington, Charles Tenison, E. K.
Denison, J. E. M`Taggart, Sir J. Thesiger, Sir F.
Dodd, G. Marshall, W. Thompson, Colonel
Duff, G. S. Martin, J. Vane, Lord;11.
Duncan, Viscount Masterman, John Wall, C. B.
Duncan, George Melgund, Viscount Wllllams•n, Sir H.
Ellice, Edward Mitchell, A. T.
Elliot, J. E. Morris, David TELLEZB.
Evans, William O'Connor, Feargus Hutt, William
Fordyce, A. 1). Osborne, Ralpk Forster, M.
Fortescue, J. W. Palmer, Robert

HARRIS v. NICHOLSON.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE Silt.'.
Sin,—Under the above heading, in your paper of Sa-
turday, I find a report of certain proceedings alleged to
have taken place in the Westminster County Court, on
Friday. March 24th. In that report there is a vast deal
of mischievous fiction founded on one isolated fact, viz.,
that I do owe the plaintiff is!., and when he can legally
obtain it he will be paid, and not till then. There are
some claims which, though legally recoverable, may be
offensively pursued,: engendering ill-feeling on one or
both sides, enforced with impetuosity, and resisted
with indignation. The case in question is one of them.
The report states that a judgment had been obtained
against me, and that I had been ordered to pay the debt
by instalments. No judgment had been obtained and I
was not ordered to pay the debt by instalments, nor did
I ever solicit, either personally or by agent, any such
indulgence. The next statement is, that I sent a friend
to say that I was ill in bed. I was not ill in bed, but
publicly in my business all day, and I did not send a
friend or any body else to make such a statement. The
" friend" is next made to say that he had not seen me
that day (FRIDAY), but he had seen me the day before,
in bed at two o'clock. No person saw me in bed any day
at two o'clock. lam neither an invalid, nor a sluggard,
and on the day in question I was up and out before
eleven o'clock. At this part of the case a scene is got
up between the judge and the agent, or the stranger
to me, who is called in the report my " friend."
A facetious crossfire is carried on to the great
amusement of the crowd, who express their approba-
tion by intermittent bursts of laughter. The judge
observes to the gentleman who gratuitously undertakes
to be my deputy, " that he supposes he is not a doctor."
Then, after supposing him no doctor, he asks him " it
he has felt my pulse, and what are the symptoms of my
disorder."—(Renewed laughter—vide report.) My
Learned Brother then proves that there is but one step
from the ridiculous to the sublime, and who with such a
facile grace can turn from grave to gay, from lively to
severe! After deploring my irregularities and late
hours, after tenderly inquiring if my pulse has been felt,
and the nature of my indisposition, instead of "frater-
nizing," my brother coolly, and with a livid hardihood,
sentences me to twenty days imprisonment in the
county gaol. Who could have imagined so tragical an
end? The great art of the playwright is to conceal the
" denouement." Here is the farce of Midas, con-
cluding with a tragic scene. "He can bear no brother
near his throne." Now, Sir, I solemnly declare that I
never instructed any " friend," " agent," or any other
person to appear fur me in the case before you. If the
report be a correct one, some officious persons must have
tendered the excuses made, but I am no party to them.
There may be persons about the County Court, as about
police offices, who are ready to speculate their services,
uninstructed and unauthorised, upon the remote chance
of a few shillings reward, if a point is gained.
Bold Turpin rode the King's highway,
To magnify his stores,
He did not like desk practice
So he practised out of doors ;
The public were his clients, for
He was a road solicitor.
These peripatetic lawyers are injurious to the best in-
terests of society, and, in my humble opinion, should
not be heard in any of our courts. Not even in the
County Courts, as amicus curia to a sportive judge in
the discharge of his jovial and laughter-stir-
ring duties. I now, Sir, presume to remark
upon the ill-natured character of the report.
The plaintiff not being present was non-
suited, and then comes the following remarks, semi-
editorial—" The warrant of commitment was then re-
scinded, the Chief Baron thus escaping, through the
absence of the plaintiff, incarceration in the common
gaol of the county for the present." Supposing the
plaintiff had been present, and the warrant made out, the
payment of the money would, I presume, have saved the
Chief Baron from so ignominious a fate. But in the
remarks quoted I am spoken of as a lucky felon escap-
ing a just punishment by an accident—a kind of flaw in
the indictment amounting to this admonition:—" Don't
let me see you here again, young man. You have had
a narrow escape, for which you are indebted to the
neglect of the prosecutor, and not to any want of guilt
on your part. Lead a moral life, and don't owe any-
body eighteen pounds again; if you do, such a miracle
may not await you." The County Courts were formed
as a merciful tribunal, to take honest debtors out of the
hands of malignant creditors and rapacious attornies—
a court of arbitration between man and man—but the
report of proceedings therein is most cruel and unjusti-
fiable. A man, and many there are, meritorious and
honest, but still short of money, who would go privately
to a solicitor, or a plaintiff, and say, " Pray take this
small debt of me by weekly instalments," yet might rea-
sonably dread to make the same appeal to the County
Court, because the chances are that his distress is
blaceled forth in the papers the next day, his little
credit damned, and his censorious neighbours point at
him as a tainted example of a man who cannot pay a
few pounds. To being short of money I plead guilty,
and I only wish that the numbers who crowd round my
door daily to borrow, and to beg, would believe me.
With every apology for so long an intrusion upon your
valuable space, and thanks for the insertion of this
explanatory communication, I have the honour to be
your obedient servant,
RENTON NICHOLSON.
Garrick's Head, Bow-street, March 25, 1843.
[The report in question was taken from a morning
contemporary.—En. San.]

IRELAND.--LIVIDZPOOL, MONDAY.—The following
letter was received this morning by a tradesman in this
town from a relative residing in the neighbourhood of
Dublin Saturday Night, 9 o'clock.—An officer that
is lodging with us has just received information that
there is an outbreak at Limerick, and the people have
beaten the soldiers. The hills which are seen from here
are illuminated with large fires. We can see twenty
from our window." We have received no confirmation

of this report.
BRITISH AMERICAN LAND COMPANY.—The an•
nual general meeting of the shareholders in this corn
pany was held yesterday. The objects which the coin•
pany have in view aro the settlement of lands in the
eastern townships of Lower Canada. The business of
the day was to receive a report from the directors, and
to re-elect members of the board. M. A. Gillespie, the
governor, took the chair, and after the minutes of the
last court had been read, the secretary went through the
report. Mr. Gillespie remarked that the accounts of the
company were now before the meeting, and he trusted
that the report was sufficiently explanatory. From a
visit ho had made to the company's lands, he could state
that he thought very favourably of those situated at
Sherbrook, Stanstead, St. Francis, &c., where the crops
were luxuriant and new branches of cultivation were
being introduced. Besides paper and grist mills there
were various factories established, and the railway
would open up their lands for settlement. The governor
then weld into further details about the progress of the
railway, the accounts, &c. The report was then adop-
ted, the election took place, and thanks having been
voted to the board, the meeting broke up.
BURGLARY AND ATTEMPTED MURDER. OF A
POLICEMAN.—A burglary, attended with unparalleled
cruelty to one of the City police constables, was perpe
trated by a gang of notorious characters yesterday
(Sunday) morning. It appears that shortly after three
o'clock the constable on duty in Petticoat-lane, in pass-
ing the premises of Mr. Joseph, a general and marina
storedealer, discovered a number of sheathing nails ly-
ing on the cellar flap. This excited his suspicions, and
having aroused the inmates, it was ascertained that the
premises had been burglariously entered and a consider-
able quantity of copp,2r nails taken away. Information
of that fact was instantly communicated to the several
police stations, and from questions put to the officers on
the beats surrounding the lane, it was clearly ascertained
that none of the property had been carried past them,
consequently it was imagined that it was concealed in the
neighbourhood, and that when the night men went•off
duty at six o'clock in the morning an attempt would be
made to remove it. To prevent the same, some of the
reserve police was sent out in private clothes to watch.
Amongst the number was a constable of the name of
Pearson, and whilst ho was walking along the
lane, four or five fellows pouaced upon him and cried
out, " here is one of the b— dogs that is looking
after us, let us settle him." They had barely uttered
the words, when they all pitched into him, first throw-
ing him upon the ground, then kicking and jumping
upon him, evidently trying all they could to deprive the
poor fellow of life. To such an extent did they carry
out their brutality, that they nearly kicked out his eyes.
In jumping on him they broke one of his legs. Having
as they thought killed the constable, they made off, and
up to nine o'clock last night had not been heard of.
The constable when found by one of his comrades, who
had left him only for a few minutes, was in a dreadful
state of suffering. Medical aid was immediately pro-
cured, and the unfortunate fellow remains is a very
precarious condition. One of the fellows is well known
to the City and Metropolitan police, and a full descrip-
tion of the party, with his name and height, has been
sent to every station-house in London, so that in all
probability the villain will be speedily brought to jus-
tice. From certain information received by Mr. D. W.
Harvey, the chief commissioner, it was expected that
some of the gang would make an attack upon the police
in Petticoat-lane during the night; a number of men
from each of the City divisions was therefore ordered to
meet there at twelve o'clock last night (Sunday), to pro-
tect the constables on duty.
Principal contents of the Observer, of Sunday,
March 26 :—Thirteen folio columns of first•rate and
latest political news from France, Austria, Prussia,
Italy, and all parts of the continent—Saturday's Elec-
tion Committees, a folio column—Upwards of a column
of Saturday Maryl-bono Vestry Meeting—About 100
useful Advertisements—Two columns of latest Irish
news—Upwards of a column of births, marriages, and
deaths, and sixteen columns of latest miscellaneous in-
telligence. Price of the Übscre'r, 6d.—Monday's edition,
at four, Monday afternoons.
RECREATION FOR THE PEOPLE CIIEAPER AND DIORE
EFFICIENT TITAN HOSPITALS AND GAOLS.—The Legis-
lature, public bodies, should provide places of healthy,
innocent recreation, good for both soul and body, and
accessible to the whole population; gratuitous baths,
washhouses, libraries, museums, parks, reading-rooms,
gymnasia, concert-rooms—places, in short, where harm-
less, inexpensive, recreation might successfully enter the
lists with debauchery and vice. God knows they would
be better, cheaper, more efficient than gaols, peniten-
tiaries, panopticons, and patent drops; which, indeed,
they would in time replace. Sanitary and moral reforms
go together; and as a healthy cheerful, well-lighted,
well-regulated, abode is found cheaper and better, more
conducive to health and happiness than one that reeks
with dirt, disease, and immorality; so reading-rooms,
museums, parke, and picture-galleries would be found
civilian's, cheaper and better than the silent cell, the
gallows, and the scourge.—Dr.sl`Cormac, of Belfast, in
the Builder.