The Sun.
London, England, 1851-05-07 00:00:00

LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MAY 7, 1851.

pointment. In conveying these sentiments to you, sir,
I am performing both a pleasing and a painful duty
—pleasing, because I have the honour to be selected to
express the unanimous kind feeling of so many gentle-
men of the county towards you—and painful, because
the time has arrived for our separation. In taking our
leave of you let me express a hope that we may
all meet again at no very distant period. When
I entered this room I had no idea that I should be called
upon to address you, therefore I have had no time to
study eloquence. My words are words of the heart, and
if I have succeeded in conveying to you the sentiments
of the gentlemen who are now present in as strong a
manner as I know they feel them, I shall be truly happy.
I now, sir, in the name of my brother magistrates, beg
you to accept of our sincere and heartfelt wishes for
your health, happiness, and prosperity, and in this ear-
nest wish we beg to include Lady Ommanney and the
whole of your family.
At the close of Sir Henry's address, Sir JoHN OXMAN-
NEY rose and replied to the following effect:—My Lord
and Gentlemen, I avail myself of this opportunity to do
that which common courtesy towards yourselves would
have required of me, and which is now rendered the
more necessary from the course which you have been
pleased to take. I thank you all for the very kind man-
ner in which you have been pleased to receive Sir Henry
Leeke's proposal, which has gratified me very much, and
I thank him too for the way in which he has made it. I
have now acted as a magistrate for, I think, 38 years, and
am almost the oldest magistrate in the county. At one
time, when I lived elsewhare, I acted for three divisions
in this county, but never did I act where I met with so
much support and good will from my brother magistrates
as I have uniformly done in this division. I am an
old man now, and by God's Providence I have been
blessed with much good health, as well as permitted to
come to an advanced time of life. I cannot, therefore,
look with any degree of expectation to a return to this
neighbourhood, but that matter is in higher hands. And
should a yetlonger life be extended to me, I shall meet you
again with the utmost pleasure; and even now, although
removed from each other, I trust we may not be separated.
I do from my heart assure you, that could I have antici-
pated the pain I have been put to in parting from my
friends, I could not have made up my mind to accept the
appointment, important in every respect as I know it to
be. If business or pleasure should lead any of you to
the neighbourhood in which I am about to be placed, I
assure you that you will ever find from me the open
hand and the hearty welcome. My Lord and gentle-
men, again I thank you for your great kindness.
Several other gentlemen present made some observa-
tions, indicating their high sense of Sir John's services
as a magistrate, and Lord Henry Cholmondeley (after
expressing his entire concurrence in all the observations
of Sir Henry Lecke) added that Sir John had often put
to shame men much younger than himself, and who had
a much less distance to trarel, by the punctuality and
regularity of his attendance at the Magistrates' Meet-
ings.—Devonport Independent.

MURDER of a HUSBAND in SHEFFIELD.
On Sunday morning the intelligence of a shocking
catastrophe was announced at the police-office, Sheffield.
The scene where the tragedy took place is in a square in
Duke-street, Sheffield-park. The name of the murdered
ma❑ is John Wilkinson, and the two parties in custody
on the serious charge are his wife, Eliza Wilkinson, and
John Batterley, a goods porter on the Manchester,
Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway.
The following particulars have transpired. About
two o'clock on Sunday morning the wife of the deceased
took refuge in the house of a next-door neighbour,
alleging as her reason a family quarrel. On the follow-
ing morning the door of the house was found to be fas-
tened by a spring latch, and was ultimately opened by a
daughter of deceased's, who slept in the upper part of
the house. The body of deceased was then found in a
prostrate position in a pool of blood; the furniture,
walls, and ceilings were also besprinkled with it.
Wounds were found on the head and throat, and a
pocket- knife was discovered under a chair at the feet of
deceased.
The prisoner Batterley was a cousin of the deceased,
and lodged with him up to Saturday night. A jealous
feeling seems to have existed on the part of the deceased.
Batterley was reported to have left the house on the
night in question. O❑ Sunday afternoo❑ he reached his
parents' dwelling near Worksop. Hearing that policemen
had been there in search of him, he by the first train
on Monday morning returned to the scene of murder,
where he was forthwith arrested. That the murder was
one attended with much violence appears from the state-
ments of a neighbour, who alleges to have heard noises
and strugglings of a most terrifying and unnatural cha-
racter soon after midnight.
The wife says that her escape from the alleged vio-
lence of her husband was effected through a window.
The prisoner Batterley is about 22 years of age. Both
himself and deceased are represented to have been steady,
well-conducted men.

of the world on the service of the Crown. His next ob-
jection was to the mode in which it was proposed to re-
duce the number of captains. Every captain who came
to the top of the list was to be asked whether he had
served six years afloat. If he had, then he was to be
told to pass on to the admirals' list; but if he did not,
then he was to be told to pass off to thereat.. admirals'list,
and was to be put on half-pay at once for the rest of his
life. He would suppose that there were three, whom he
would call Captain A, Captain B, and Captain C; Cap-
tain A is introduced to the secretary of the Admiralty;
he looks rather old—indeed, he is 65 or 70; he is rather
subject to the rheumatism, and his nerves are somewhat
out of order. But he has served his six years afloat,
although it unfortunately happens that it was some 20
years ago. " Well," says the Secretary, " let him go
to the active list." Captain Bis then introduced. He
has served his six years afloat, but it has been at South-
ampton, or some such place, in the packet service.
" Oh," says the Secretary, " pass him on, too, to the
admirals list." Captain Cis then introduced. " Have
you served six years at sea?" " No," is his reply;
" though willing, I was not able to get employment."
He is a hearty, healthy man, knows his business, and is
anxious to serve, but he has not been employed, and
therefore the order is given, "Put him on the retired
list." Such was the fact. An officer, who had gained
his laurels many years ago, and who was perhaps too
old to acquire more, might be placed on the active list,
while another was placed on the retired list when he
was able and willing to serve, but was rendered incapable
of serving by this new regulation. It was true, that
it was intended by it to give an honourable retirement
to those officers who were worn out in the service; but
it was not just to use it to turn out officers who were
yet capable and desirous of serving. You lay down a
rigid law that every officer must serve six years before
he can have his flag; but do you offer to every officer
the opportunity of serving for that time? No; you have
not been able to employ your captains of late for that
period in active service; and, therefore, your recent re-
gulation is but a summary process for turning a certain
portion of them out of the service. The reduction of the
number of captains on the active list from 500 to 350
was an extraordinary course, whereby they were enabled
to place on the active list many officers who ought to
retire, and remove from it many officers who ought to be
retained in the service. The order, in its very words,
implied a contradiction, though he hoped that there was
no contradiction in reality. Their Lordships observed
"that their arrangement included the creation of ten pen.
I sions for admirals." That item of ten pensions would
entail on the country an additional expenditure per
annum, but they went on to express their hope that the
Lords of the Treasury " would not withhold their as-
sent to a small charge which will enable them to effect a
beneficial alteration with due consideration of the claims
of old officers." It was therefore a matter of some doubt
yet whether these pensions would be granted. But
their Lordships further observed, "As vacancies occur
in the active list of flag-officers, the captain first in
seniority who has served for his flag will be proj
moted (reserving her Majesty's undoubted right of selec-
tion)." In that last parenthesis there was a loophole for
the Admiralty to creep out of at their pleasure—for the
order proceeded:—" Those captains who rise to their
flag, and who have not served"—he took it for granted
that this meant those who have not served for six years
—" will be placed on permanent half-pay, rising in rank
as at present, but with the half-pay of rear-admirals."
The right of the Crown to select its officers had existed
f r many a long year in the naval service of the country,
and he should be sorry if it should ever cease to exist.
It was in the power ot the Crown to place any admiral
in the command of a squadron in any part of the world,
and the Crown was now about to delegate the same com-
mand to any commodore. The Government was now
going to ask for an increased grant of money to do that
which was an act of injustice on a certain number of
officers. It would then have, apparently, a very active
list, from which it could select able officers; but, in
reality, the condition of the navy would be just the
same. You would have two lists, in one of which you
would have an increased amount of pay to certain admi-
rals and captains, while in the other you would con-
tinue their pay at its present amount. There was no
chance of this new regulation turning out a substantial
saving. He had mentioned the circumstances of this
case to the House for the purpose of showing how ineffi-
cient the machinery of this regulation was to carry its
object into effect.
The Earl of MINT() had no objection to the produc-
tion of this return. He concurred in the propriety of
many of the Noble Earl's observations; and especially
in that in which he had commented on the extreme in-
justice of taking as the only test of an officer's capacity
the period which he had passed in the command of a
ship at sea. Still he must say that it did appear to
him that some experience at sea was an indispensable
qualification for command. The Noble Lord then en-
tered into some further explanations on the subject of
this arrangement; but we could not hear distinctly any
two consecutive sentences of the remainder of his
speech.
After a few remarks from Lord COLCHESTER,
which were equally inaudible,
Lord STANLEY observed, that the speech of the
Noble Earl opposite had strengthened rather than con-
firmed the case made out by his Noble Friend behind
him. He hoped that he did not misapprehend the Noble
Earl opposite, when he understood him to say that
this document was rather a suggestion of the Board
of Admiralty than a measure of the Government.
He (Lord Stanley) did not understand that this
arrangement had yet met the approbation of the
Cabinet; yet, he could hardly reconcile the idea that it
was not yet finally determined on by the Cabinet with
the fact that the paper now moved for had been laid on
the table of the other House of Parliament, and along
with it a statement that it had been sanctioned by the
Board of Admiralty. He was afraid this " suggestion"
would shortly be carried into execution by the House of
Commons. He was glad that this discussion had taken
place, as it would call the attention of the Government
to the subject, and thus give it a locus penitentide. No
one had denied the injustice of the system of compulsory
retirement consequent upon an officer not having served
a certain number of years when it was not optional with
him whether he would serve that time or not. He asked
the Government whether they were determined to insist
upon the period of six years? That period had been taken
when there was a larger number of captains afloat, but
if the same period were required at a time when there
were not one-tenth or one-twentieth so many captains
afloat it would greatly enhance the difficulty of captains
arriving in due course of time at their flsg.—(flear.)
Earl TALBOT admitted the great necessity of, if pos-
sible, limiting the dead weight of the country, but it
ought not to be done to the injury of old naval officers,
numbers of whom had been many years upon the list,
but, in spite of all their exertions, had never been able
to obtain the command of a ship, He hoped that the
question would be considered in all its bearings by Par-
liament before they sanctioned such an injustice as was
contemplated by the Government plan. While speaking
upon the subject of the navy he begged to refer to a
recent order with respect to the examination of naval
cadets. He thought, though he admitted that the ex-
amination Ives excessively slight. only extending to such
matters as the first three rules of arithmetic and the like,
that a boy, upon being examined on his entrance into the
service, might, from nervousness or timidity, be unable
to answer the questions that were put to him, and in
such a case it was a hardship that the boy should not be
allowed to go up again, but should have his nomination
altogether cancelled.
Earl GREY said, if it had been intended to discuss
the merits of the Government plan upon this subject it
was only fair that a longer notice should have been given
tohfethmaottiinontenwtsiosmly
n;But as that had not been done, and as
for a return, he was not possessed
of so much information upon the subject as he might
tohte herwisehave had. In the first place, it he understood
matter, no officer would suffer by this arrangementin any pecuniary point of view; but the gist of complaint
was thet the feelings of officers were injured by their
being placed upon the retired instead of on the active
list. He should be the last person to sanction any mea-
sure to wound the feelings of so meritorious a class of
men, but he believed that it was for the interest of the
country and of the service that the nominal acting list
should not be unnecessarily swelled by having.upon it a
large number of officers who were practically retired,
but that, being at present far beyond the real wants of
the service, it should be reduced as much as possible.
For his own part, he thought that the rule requiring a
certain amount of experience in the command of a
ship befure taking command of a fleet was an exceed-
nnsdayh, ebbuetneavfetderall,
that
ingly good one. Whether six years were or were not
thetoo
line
musta t time
be
drawn
e
somewhere, and to
itwls not
o form ewhhi
the rule with regard to the six years was established
in 1827, when we had a very much smaller number of
ships afloat than at this moment. With reference to the
s
other point which had been raised by the Noble Lord
opposite (Earl Talbot), he had never heard of the ques-
tion before, but he thought it appeared that the new re-
gulation was a desirable one. There were infinitely
more candidates for admission into the navy than could
by possibility be admitted, and surely it was de-
sirable that of that great number they should have the
very best. He was reminded by his Noble Friend (Emil
Minto) that in the case of an unsuccessful examination
there might probably be a second nomination, and a se-
cond examination.

Lord STANLEY observed, that in 1827 the officers
who then stood for the flag were captains of 1799, and
so late down as 1840 the officers who stood next for the
flag were captains of 1806. Therefore, in 1840 the offi-
cers who stood next were officers who had been post-cap-
tains from 1806 up to the close of the war, or 10 years.
Earl TALBOT wished to know if the Noble Earl (the
Lord Privy Seal) could confirm what the Noble Earl
at the bead of the colonies had stated as to a second no-
mination being allowed for the same lad, and thereupon
a second examination?
Earl 11. INTO was not able to speak officially on that
point, but be gathered from what information he had
upon the subject that such would be the case.
The return was then ordered, and the House
adjourned.

HOUSE OF COJWMONS, May G.
The SPEAKER took the Chair a few minutes to Four
o'clock.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
passeThe following Bills were read a third time and
d:—
Briton Ferry, Docks, and Railway.
Ministers 'Widows and Orphans' Fund of the Free
Church of Scotland.
Reading Waterworks.
The reports on the following Bills were considered
and agreed to:—
Dundee and Arbroath Railway.
Saint Andrew*' Railway.
PETITIONS.
Mr. G. BERKELEY presented a petition from 1
Gloucestershire, praying for a mere stringent measure
against Ptipal aggression.
Sir R. INGLIS presented a petition from St. John's,
Westminster, against Papal aggression.

Mr. ROBARTES presented petitions from the Wes-
leyan Methodists of Tywandreath, St. Austel, and
Charleston, against Papal aggression.
Mr. H. DRUMMOND presented petitions to the same
effect.
Mr. GOOLD presented petitions in favour of a General
Medical Charities Bill from Newcastle, Askeston, Pol•
lorkenry, and Kilmallock, county of Limerick.
Mr. HORS MAN presented a petition from a place in
Dorsetshire, complaining of the want of church accom-
mation.
Mr. CHRISTOPHER presented a petition from Lin-
colnshire, praying for more stringent provisions in the
Ecclesiastical Titles Bill; also a petition from farmers
and graziers in Hertfordshire, in favour of the removal
of Smithfield market.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD presented a petition praying for
certain alterations in the Valuation of Land Bill.
Mr. GROGAN presented a petition from the Corpo-
ration of Dublin against the withdrawal of grants from
the hospitals or Dublin.
Mr. COBDEN presented a petition from Falkirk
complaining of the bribery and corruption at the last
election, and praying for some measure to prevent such
practices at elections.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from Marylebone
against the Sunday Trading Bill; also a petition from
Montrose against the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill; and a
petition signed by 40,000 inhabitants of Edinburgh
against the tax for ministers' money.
Mr. Sergeant MURPHY presented a petition from the
city of Cork praying for the abolition of ministers' money,
NOTICES OF MOTION.
Colonel SALWEY gave notice that on the 20th in-
stant he should move for the appointment of a Select
Committee to inquiry into the military Knights of
Windsor.
Sir W. CLAY gave notice, on behalf of Lord Robert
Grosvenor, that on the 22d instant the Noble Lord
would move the repeal of the attorney's certificate duty.
Mr. HENRY BERKELEY gave notice that he would
bring forward his motion on the subject of the ballot
this day fortnight.
Colonel SIBTHORP gave notice of his intention to
move certain amendments to the Property and Income-
tax Bill, on the bringing up of the report.
Mr. Sergeant MURPHY gave notice of amendments
to the Improvement of Towns (Ireland) Bill.
Mr. GRANTLEY BERKELEY gave notice that he
should bring forward his motion relative to the sugar
duties on the 22d instant.

THE IRISH STATE PRISONERS.
Mr. ANSTEY, pursuant to notice, wished to ask the
Hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary for the Colonies,
the question with reference to the treatment of the Irish
state prisoners in Van Diemen's Land. These prisoners
had been allowed tickets of leave, and, acting under
the impression that this privilege gave them
the right of travelling about wherever they
pleased in the colony, they paid a visit to Mr.
Smith O'Brien to congratulate him on his release
from the severity of his punishment under the sanction
of a ticket of leave. Now it seemed this had been con-
sidered a violation of the law, and the three prisoners
were carried before police magistrates, before whom the
question of right was fully argued and sustained, but
the law officers of the Crown being of opinion
that they possessed no such right, a compromise was
effected, and the cases were dismissed, upon the under-
standing that the prisoners would not quit their allotted
districts again without leave. This result, it appeared,
had offended the Governor, and he had not only repri-
manded the magistrates, but revoked the tickets of leave,
and sent the prisoners into confinement again. Now the
question he wished to ask the Under-Secretary of State
for the Colonies was, whether he had received any in-
formation from his Excellency Sir William Denison, the
Lieutenant-Governor of Van Diemen's Land, on the
subject of the recent withdrawal of tickets of I
leave formerly granted to Messrs. M'Manus, O'Doherty,
and O'Donohne, and the removal of those gentle-
men, for certain terms of imprisonment, to
the penal settlement of Port Arthur: whether
the measures in question were adopted at the
arbitrary command of the Lieutenant-Governor, and in
contravention of the decisions of the proper magistrates
upon the cases of alleged infraction of discipline stated
by his Excellency in justification of such measures;
and whether the correspondence on these subjects would
be laid before the House?
Mr. HAWES said, with regard to the statement of
facts which the Hon. Member had indulged in, he had
no observation to make at all, because he could
neither affirm nor contradict them. It was perfectly
true, however, that the tickets of leave had been with-
drawn, and for the simple reason that the prisoners had
wilfully violated the known regulations under which
they were granted—indeed, one of the prisoners had
left his district in direct opposition to the ex-
pressed orders of the Governor, and the
Colonial,office, therefore, saw nothing whatever in the
conduct of the Governor which called for censure in any
way. He might add, that if the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber would move for it, he was quite ready to lay before
the House the dispatch which had been received from
the colony on the subject.
Mr. ANSTEY gave notice that on the first Supply
night, he should move a vote of censure on the Governor
by way of amendment to going into Committee.
SEWERS RATE.
Sir B. HALL rose to ask Viscount Ebrington, from
how many and what districts of the metropolis the
sewers rate of 6d. in the pound, recently ordered, is col-
lected; what sum that rate will produce; whether the
several rates are to be expended in the districts from which
they are collected; what new works are proposed, and
whether such works are to be completed before the present
Commission expires; aad, if not, what portions will be
completed; and whether any part of the extraordinary
amount about to be levied is to be applied to payments
of existing liabilities, and, if so, how much is to be so
applied?
Lord EBRINGTON said he had some difficulty in
answering the question which had been put to him. With
regard to the first question he had to state that the
rate was only levied in eight districts. Certainly the
rate would be collected and expended in the same dis-
tricts in which they were collected, and as to the works
being executed before the present Commission expires, he
could not understand that question, because the present
Commission would expire at the end of the present ses-
sion.

RAILWAY ACCIDENT IN CHESHIRE.
In answer to question from Mr. C. LEGH,
Mr. LABOUCHERE said that he had not received
the report from the inspector of railways as to the late
railway accident in Cheshire, and therefore he could not
answer any questions on the subject; but when ho had
received the report he should be perfectly prepared to
give any information on the subject.
MERCANTILE MARINE BILL.
Mr. DISRAELI gave notice that, on an early day, he
should present a petition in favour of extensive modifi-
cations in the Mercantile Marine Bill.
AYLESBURY ELECTION.
On the motion of Mr. R. PALMER a Select Com-
mittee was appointed to consider the petitions of Mr. T.
tV. Bradford and John Strutt, en the subject of this
election.

POOR-RATES—AGRICULTURAL BURDENS.
Mr. GRANTLEY BERKELEY rose to move a reso-
ution in a Committee of the whole House, thst to alle-
viate a portion of tize burdens from which the agricul-
tural interest is at present suffering, through the
payment of parochial poor-rates, varying in many
instances from 65., 75.. Bs., 95., to 13s. 10d. in the pound,
it will be necessary to substitute an equalized poor-
rate, in England and Wales, not exceeding Is. 6d.
in the pound, and subject to local government.
Some perishes were paying 17s. in the pound;
Bishop Weartneuth, he believed, even paid as much
as 19s. 9d. He proposed that there should be an
immediate frezh assessment for making rates for the
support of the poor, in order to remove the
inequalities of the present system of rating. A
copper, tin, or iron mine, for instance, which
yielded 10,0004 a year was exempted from the tax,
while a coal mine in the same neighbourhood, pro-
ducing only 200/., had to pay the full rate. If
the whole mines in the kingdom now exempted were
made to pay towards the support of the poor,
the poor-rates would no longer be burdensome,
and would be easily borne. He wished to make a na-
-1 tional rate, but he totally disagreed with the pro-
position that the cost of the poor should be
paid out of thse Consolidated Fund. He wished to
maintain, if powsible, a local power, in order to oheck
all unnecessary expense. He would suggest that
there should be a general maximum rate of
Is. 6d. in the pound. Some would say that this
would be unfair to those localities which paid a less sum,
but he found if his plan were adopted there would be a
much greater number of districts benefited than compelled
to pay a larger MM. Besides, he did not think as high a
rate as is. 6d. would be required; he only fixed that as the
maximum rate which should be assessed. The Hon.
Member concluded by proposing his motion.
Captain HARRIS seconded the resolution. He referred to
the report of Mr. Beckett, a Poor-law Commissioner, who
stated that he had perceived in many quarters a feeling in
favour of a national rate • and the justice of the principle had
been acknowledged by the Secretary of the Treasury, who in
his evidence before the Lords' Committee last year, though
he put forward many difficulties, said nevertheless he was
quite prepared to admit that, unless it could be shown that
there was a special reason in favour of a local tax limited to
real property, it -was more fair and equitable to defray the
expense of poor relief out of a national tax, to comprehend
all descriptions of property. The plan of Lord Malmesbury
made every man pay according to his ability, and retained
local management. No fewer than 200 unions had given in
their adherence to it; in the union where he (Captain
llarris) attended the board of guardians there were objec-
tions to it at first, but they agreed to it after a discussion.
Lord Malmesbury proposed to ascertain the whole poor-
law expenditure for seven years. For the seven years pre-
vious to March, 1849, the total expenditure for England,
Wales, and Scotland was 5,850,0001. He then ascertained
what amount of tax would reach that average. sd. in the
pound levied on every species of income down to 301. would
meet the expenditure. The Poor-law Board would draw from
the Exchequer the average sum for each parish and union ;
and if the guardians exceeded the sum remitted to them they
would be called on to raise a rate-in-aid on the real property
in the parish; but, if a surplus accrued, the amount would
be applied to the county rate.
Mr. BAINES hoped the Hon. Gentleman who brought
forward this motion, and the Hon. Gentleman who secondedmisthem
it, would not think him guilty of any disrespect w
if he should pass over many of the topics to which they had
directed the attention of the House, seeing it was his desire
to confine himself as closely as possible to the resolution
which had been submitted for their approval. The questions
of settlement, of assessment, of personal property, and other
matters which had been introduced into the discussion were
each of them of sufficient importance to merit a distinct dis-
cussion ; but lie did not think they should be mixed up with
the question now before the House, and therefore, instead of
referring to them, he would confine his observations solely to
the resolution
thonwehich had hem proposed. But, before he did
House would permit him to allude to the
appealsoh made to him personally by the Hon. Member for
West Gloucestershire, as to the Poor-law returns for which
he
held him responsible. The Hon. Member asked how it
was that in 1846 a change was made by a general order of I
the Poor-law Ward in the 'node which, up to that tittle,

had prevailed of stating the number of paupers; and he
Seemed to say that this change had been made for the sake of
delusion, and rendering the returns valueless. Now, the
Hon. Member had not given him any notice that it was his
intention to allude to him as responsible for a change that
took place three years before he came into office.—(Hear,
hear.) He conjectured that that change was made for the
purpose of bringing about more correct and satisfactory
results, and his belief was that such had been the effect of
the change.--(Hear, hear.) The resolution which had
been moved by the Hon. Gentleman sought to affirm the ex-
pediency of relieving the destitute poor of this country by
means of a national rate.-7-(Hear, hear.) He did not use
these words vary often in the course of his address; he
rather seemed to avoid them ; but the whole question in-
volved in his proposal was, whether the House of Com-
mons was prepared to affirm the expediency f f maintaining
the destitute poor out of a national rate.—(Hear, hear ) He
was happy to think that the subject of a national rate up
to this time had not met with much favour from Parliament,
and he should be surprised if it was more favourably re-
ceived on that occasion. In 1847 a Committee of that
House was appointed at the instance of his predecessor (Mr.
Buller) for investigating the whole subject of settlement, re-
moval, and rating. This Committee, composed of some of
the ablest members of the House, heard evidence on the
whole of these questions, including that of a national rate,
which was brought before them very distinctly by several
witnesses; but it was remarkable enough that when the
Committee came to consider what recommendations they
should make to the House, not one member of it took up the
subject of a national rate at all, or propounded it as a re-
medy deserving a moment's consideration by Parliament.
—(Hear, hear.) Two years ago a motion was brought
forward by the late Lord Nugent in that House for the ap-
pointment of a Committee to consider the
_propriety of
a national rate ; but the motion of the Noble Lord
was negatived without a division.—(Hear, hear.)
They had lately been called upon to discuss in a va-
riety of ways the subject of the burdens on land. Several
motions bearing upon that point had been brought forward
by the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, and everything
that ingenuity and ability could do was urged by him in
favour of his object; but the Hon. Gentleman never pro-
pounded a national rate as that which was likely to afford
relief to the agricultural or any other portion of the com-
munity.--(Hear, hear.) Such had been the reception given
to this proposal in times past, and he could not think that,
on the ground of any arguments which had been used by
the Hon. Member for West Gloucestershire, the House would
'now recommend the adoption of a national rate.—.(Hear.)
What was the precise proposition of the Hon. Member? It
was, that " to alleviate a portion of the burdens from which
the agricultural interest at present is suffering through the
payment of parochial poor- rates," it was necessary " to sub-
stitute an equalised poor-rate in England and in Wales, not
•exceeding ls. 6d. in the pound, and subject to local govern-
ment," The Hon. Gentleman said something about union
rating in the course of his address. He would not now enter
'upon that wide subject, but would simply remark that it was
essentially different from a national rate ; first, because the
area over which the union rate could be distributed was ma-
nageable for all necessary purposes, and secondly, because
-every person who contributed to a union rate had by himself
or his representatives a voice in the expenditure of the mo-
ney that was raised.—(Hear, hear.) It was raised within a
certain area, and expended within that same area.—(Hear,
hear.) There were in England and Wales 5,000 parishes
maintaining separately their own poor, almost altogether of
an agricultural character, the rates in which were under ls.
3d. • but he Hon. Member for West Gloucestershire pro-
posed to raise the rates of all these parishes from 2d., 3d., or
4d. in the pound, which many of them now paid, to Is. 6d.
in the pound.—(Hear.) The excessive injustice of this, to
say nothing of its effects on the interests of agriculture,
must be evident to every one. In one place there was a parish
where the expenditure was carefully managed, and in another
they found one where it was wasteful and extravagant, and a
system at work at once injurious to the ratepayers, and de-
moralizing and debasing to the poor; yet the Hon. Gentle•
man would put these parishes on the same footing ;—the
parish that now paid a high rate would be lowered to Is. 6d.,
and the one that now paid a low rate would be raised to the
same amount.—(Hear, hear.) The economy of the one
would have a reward, the extravagance of the other would
have no penalty.--(Hear, hear.) Then the Hon. Gentleman
proposed to make this change all at once. Those who this
year paid 4d. in the pound were next year to pay Is. 6d.
What effect would not this have on the property of a parish !
They had lately had considerable discussions on the incidence
of taxation, but he apprehended that with such a sudden
change as this there need be no discussion as to whether the
owners or occupiers of land were likely to suffer, for unques-
tionably the result would be that both owners and occupiers
would be the sufferers.—(Hear, hear.) Let the House con-
sider the waste that must take place under such a scheme as
this. What motive would anybody have for economy?—
(Hear, hear.) What would induce boards of guardians to
investigate minutely the applications for relief that came be-
fore them, and what an opening would there not be to the ad-
mission of the most shameless impostors ?—(Hear, hear.)
Then there was the fraud and jobbing that would unques-
tionably be committee!, and the efforts that would be made
on all hands to get the largest slice of the general national
fund.—(Hear, hear.) There would be a scramble on all
hands; many who wished to employ labourers at the cost of
others would bail the advent of the national rate, and all the
abuses of the old poor-law would once more be engendered.—
(Hear, hear.) Added to all these evils, could any one doubt
that there would be that which must startle everybody, an
indefinite increase of pauperism throughout the country—
(Hear, bear)—while the new system would be one of great
cruelty to the really deserving poor?—(Hear, hear.) People
who once got into pauperism would have no motive for
coming out of it ; habits of self-reliance would be de-
stroyed in the case of the poor, every kiad of vice would
be, encouraged, and the national character debased and de.
graded.—(Hear, hear.) Next let the House look at the
expense of the plan. The Hon. Gentleman proposed that
ifi no case should the assessment exceed is. 6d. in the pound.
Now, the total value of the rateable property of the country
in -1847 was 67,320,587/. The amount levied last year under
the head of parochial poor-rates, out of which county-rates,
borough rates, and other items were paid, was 7,270,492/.
What would be the produce of a rate of Is. 6d. in the pound?
It would amount to 5,049,0441. Deducting that from the
amount actually paid last year for the poor there would be a
deficit of 2,231,4481. - (Hear, hear. ) This was to begin
with. The Hon. Gentleman would start with a provision
that was upwards of 2,000,000/. below the necessary capon-
diture ; and how was it to be prpvided for? It must either
mane out of the consolidated fund or the poor must starve.
The Hon. Gentleman said he would have nothing to do
with the consolidated fund, and, therefore, as the poor could
not he allowed to starve, the assessment must be raised
aboVe Is. 6d. in the pound, which his resolution declared
Was not to be surpassed.—(Hear, hear) Any proposal more
Mischievous or rash it was difficult to conceive; indeed it
was the rashest and most inconsiderate scheme ever, per-
haps, brought before Parliament.—(Hear.) But then
the- Honourable Gentleman said the scheme was to
be subject to local government. Now, was it pos-
sible to conceive of local self-government with a national
rate to manage?— (Hear, hear.) Why, the thing would
become such a nuisance that everybody would be
petitioning for the abolition of local self-government as re-
spected the poor-rate.—(Hear.) He had never been for
doing away with local government, and he believed it would
be one of the greatest calamities to the country if it were
destroyed ; but he believed this would be a great blow at its
existence. Then, if there was to be a central board, only
let the House think of the stipendiaries that wonld be neces-
sary to relieve the destitute poor in some 15,0 0 places in
England and Wales, and the unconstitutional system thereby
encouraged. Let the House also consider what the conse-
quences would be in times of pressure and difficulty, when it
was understood by the poor that the Government of the
country held the national purse for their relief.—(Hear,
hear.) How would they be able to manage in periods of
convulsion with such an understanding among the people?—
(Hear, hear.) Why, it would be attended with danger to all
the best institutions of the country.—(Hear, hear ) The
Hon. Gentleman concluded by expressing the hope that the
House would negative the motion of the Hon. Member for
West Gloucestershire.
Mr. G. BERKELEY, after a few words in reply, said he
would not press his motion upon the House, and
The motion was then withdrawn.
SPIRITS IN BOND.
Lord NAAS rose to introduce his motion on the above
subject. It was, in effect, the same motion which he had
the honour to submit to the House last year, the principle of
which was affirmed by a majority of the House on two oc-
casions, and which was rejected the third time by a narrow
majority of one. (Hear, hear.) The complaint he had to
make on the part of those interested in Irish spirits was that
the-duty was levied, not on the quantity of spirits that went
into consumption, but on the quantity originally measured
into the spirit receiver, or what was technically called the
worm end, so that if the spirits were left for a considerable
time in bond, the owners had to pay duty on a considerable
quantity that had been lost by waste and evaporation. In
making this motion he laid no claim to any reduction of
taxation, or to any part of the surplus of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer. It was said that the proposal he made
would lead to fraud, and that it was an attempt to un-
settle the state of matters arranged after the appointment
of the Committee on the sugar and coffee duties, in 1848.
He found four sets of resolutions submitted to the Com-
mittee, and out of those four only one alluded to the dis-
tillers' case at all. That, he thought, might be taken as a
proof that the distillers were no parties to the settlement
which had been come to on thin subject. But,assumingthat the measure of 18 8 was a settlement of the question,
and that the distillers were satisfied with it, what was the
basis on which it was made? There was a differential duty
betsviien colonial and home-made spirits, but it was not made
in any degree by way of protection; it was merely laid on
as an equivalent, and a very inadequate equivalent, for the
restrictions and disadvantages under which the home distil-
lers laboured on account of the laws enacted for securing the
revenue. The differential duty between the colonial and
home-made spirits was 4d. per gallon. It was said that the
adoption of the plan he advocated would occasion a con-
siderable loss to the revenue. He had never heard of any
calculation as to the probable amount of . that loss, and he
believed it was a mere matter of speculation.
if His opinion
was that, so far from any loss being sustained, that plan
were adopted the revenue would be a considerable gainer. It
would cause a great increase in the consumption of whisky,
and that without any increase of intemperance, because the
sort of spirits which would then come into consumption
would be very different from that which was now con-
sumed in the three kingdoms. The people would have
ripe and proper spirit instead of the raw, crude stuff,
which they were now obliged to consume, with regard
to the export trade in spirits, it was well known that
during last year it had considerabl
.ecreased, and, so
far from its being a thriving trade, he found by the returns
that while, during the last month, the exportation of rum
from the United Kingdom amounted to 65,000 gallons, no
mention was made during the last year of any exportation of
Throughout the return the article of home made
Dirits,
ssp.irits, which might form a valuable• portion of our export
trade, was not once mentioned. In point of fact, the reten-
tion Of the present duty amounted almost to a prohibition
of the export trade in that article. It was true the English
distillers did not call for any change in the present system.
But what was the reason? Theirs was a spirit in its quality
quite different from that which was consumed by the Irish
and the Scotch. here was only eight distillers in England,
in
nothis ctwit
in effecthstanding 'he enormous quantity of spirits consumed
ountry. Owing to there being so few distillers,
they, , possessed a monopoly of the trade, and they
perceived th it if the plan which he (Lord Naas) desired to
see adopted were carried out, and the allowance granted to
the Irish and Scotch distillers, it would considerably inter-
fere with their monopoly. The Noble Lord then read the
following opinions of Messrs. Logie and Halliburton, Sur-
veying-Generals of the Excise, which was delivered by them
in 18:33, when the differential duty was Is. 6d.:—
" When spirits remain any time in the duty free ware-
house, they fall off in strength often as much as 5 per cent.,
and also fall short in quantity, in many cases to the same
amount. The duty is, however, charged on the original
quantity and strength stored, the distiller has, therefore, not
only to pay the duty in the first instance for the quantity
wasted in store by evaporation and leakage, but he has
again to pay for the difference in strength between 11 or
15 par cent., and the strength at which the spirits Lore
actually taken out of store. This we consider a, very,
great hardship, and it should in our opinion, be imme-
diately remedied. The board are aware that the im.

dutyportersfreoef, aalnldfowrehiegnn
taankdencooluotnioafl Spirits
is calculated according to the quantit
each cask is then found to contain, although, Pellltac
years under bond; we think it would be but Just
•hrsodY
this equitable regulation, which the importers of
y mayan warehoused bondts htree. tu464.11
rum, and hollands have so long enjoyed, should be '
stiedned:edit toth
woulde
absolutelydistillers o f
hthese
necessary,countries
n;
orderindeed, o wer toc,fecili
them."
The Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary-at-Brathleast,yerel
said that this was a question which concerned ,
,•
condition of the poor of Scotland, and that he eon ld not 8
the
the proposition his support, because it would demoralize e
them. But,
ofß utth,aato countryfar
was
hbay(iLncorredasNinagasi)ntferominpeirzetliii:sti.
the Right Hon. Gentleman, that his opinion
sure would tend to improve the habits of the people tf,;id
land, because (as he had said before) the spirits they 1";
lie hope
consume would be of a better quality.
wee
oh, Lu„„`t.
unsettlement 0 sioa of this demand would not be an 0, t the
had proved to the satisfaction of the House that the confete;
question ; that it was not likely to cause any greattoea
the it,
revenue;
that it would not open a door to fraud;would 13°.
would encourage the export trade in spirits; that it would
employ'
increase intemperance ; hat it would give additional
ye__ tin,
ment to the poor ; and, lastly, that it would be
bya
„leo,
portant measure in an agricultural point of view,these
ing the markets to the farmers. In consequence of fi
.0),
considerations, he thought he had not done wrong 10 'Tbe
mitting his proposition to the House.—(Cheers.) it.
Noble Lord concluded by moving that the House resolve_sent
self into a Committee, to take into consideration the Prf.
mode of levying the duty on home-made spirits in Ford for
Mr. J. WILSON, after complimenting the Noble
,iteght
the clear and temperate manner in which he bekr;heen
his motion forward, said, that as the question Drouhee.,
already settled by a Parliamentary Committee, and salt
dud
quently by the House in consequence of the report et am
Committee, he did not feel it necessary to enter again_estien
great length into the subject. If theie was one
more than another which engaged the attention of t.? duties.
mittee of 1848 it was the arrangement of the spirit &M-
it was true no Irish distiller was examined before that_ittee,
mittee, nor was there any Irish Member on the Coifs, not
—( Hear.) When that Committee was appointed it
contemplated to make the spirit duties the subject 01PLey
That would fully account for the fact of there not b°l94lin-
Irish Member on the Committee. Although the origl"deees
tention of Lord George Bentinck excluded the spirit teak
from consideration, yet during the discussions which
_„„ place before the Committee the rate of duty levied on `!":that
rum became so important a subject that the whole Vesty.
of the spirit duties was necessarily involved in the I?ani
„1,
ut, although no Irish distiller was examined, a Se°":" of•
tiller of great eminence and ability, and a person ha
giving the fullest information on the subject—Mr. und,
was examined with regard to the Scotch distilleries,!„„ tee
he (Mr. Wilson) understood the Noble Lord to Plan
claim of the Irish and of the Scotch distillers on the ea
ase
principle, he thought their case could not be more ably eel
ducted than by Mr. Greig. With regard to the differ., eie
duty, although he believed the Noble Lord was correct is
statement generally, yet he would find, from subsecloof
discussions that ensued, that a more correct estinfetlhich
afterwards made as to the component parts of that 4d• Loy
constituted that differential duty. It was intended pooh'
of the 4d. should represent the deficiency in bonded eli.flor
but a large quantity of spirits went direct from the dietl(tti' gs
into consumption, and thus the distiller had the advande
of the penny. Thus, the total quantity of spirits made
Scotland in 1850 was 11,500,000 gallons, of which ',,oe
3,760,000 gallons went into bond, leaving the produce' 0,
benefit of the penny; and the Irish distiller had tbee
vantage of Id. per gallon on 2,000,000 gallons, in the nip
way for the same year. He was aware the number a;0
tilleries had diminished in Ireland, and no doubt there a
been numerous instances of local distress, but that wile.,°oo
the same thing that had taken place in every manlffelo.
in this country also; and the whole tendency
of
nufacture was to grow up into large establishments, swee,,„a
ing up the smaller ones by the application of machinery rt-ty
capital. The Noble Lord had not stated that the quell, the of spirits produced bad increased considerably, thougeLere
number of distilleries had been diminished. In 1841 Psi,
were 82 distilleries in Ireland, which produced 6,900,000 40, lons, and last year, though there were only 53 distiller!
the quantity of spirit made was 8,236,000 gallons. lie
te;
posed the object of this motion was to compare the proof
of home-made spirits with the producer of ram. But 101400
were the facts? In 1847, the last year before the clnti4s
rum was lowered, the quantity of spirits made in Irelandsth
6,370,000. In 1850, after four years of competition roo,
rum at the altered duty, it had increased to 7,408,,t'di..
There was a complaint that the trade with England had di
minished, but would Hon. Gentlemen look from those yo;-,
preceding 1846, when the average export from Ireland
300,000 gallons, to last year, when it amounted to 82',
gallons? He admitted it had risen to 1,418,000 gallon( a
1846, but in the year previous the average was as be q
stated, and it had fallen from that year till 1853, at which te
last returns showed the above result. Now, it happened „n..01$
Der
simultaneously with this decrease from Ireland there had
an increase in the imports from Scotland. The quan
imported from the latter country had increased last year fr°.,,
',
,:
1,500,000 gallons to 2,600,000 gallons, and therefore the
ficiency of imports from Ireland was more than eompensilw,
by the increase from Scotland, It would be worth whiht
the Irish distillers to look to this question, and see why soy-
a result had taken place; for unquestionably the Scotch die'
tillers had no advantages which they did not possess
equal proportion. So far from the low duty having been fa'
vourable to the colonies, it would appear there had been $
contrary result. The quantity of home-made spirits in Ear
land, Ireland, and Scotland in 1848 was 22,102,000 all° pt.
in 1850 it had increased to 23;862,000 gallons, an increase °I
1,600,000 gallons in two years, while Ireland' and Scotian('
showed an increase of 920,000 gallons on the same period
notwithstanding this competition with the colonies. Let
them look to the colonial spirits, and they would find that is
1847 the consumption of rum was 3,328,000 gallons, while in ,
1850 it had fallen to 2,902,000 gallons, showing a decrease (3
400,000 gallons on the foreign produce. Would anyone with
these facts before him pretend to say the settlement of 1848
was unfair to the home produce?—(Hear, hear.) The
Scotch and Irish distillers could send their produce int."
this country, but the produce of the English distillers or rec-
tifiers was prohibited in Scotland and Ireland.—(No, no.)
English raw sprits night be introduced into those countries,
but not, he believed, the compound spirit, which alone WAS
consumed. The Scotch and Irish distillers would think their
case a hard one if that rule applied to them. If any party
had cause to complain, it was the English distiller. The,
consumption of spirits manufactured in England had de'
creased during the last ten years. In 1841 the quantity of
English-made spirits consumed in England was 5,900,000
gallons; in 1850 it was 5,800,000 gallons, showing a falling
off of 100,000 gallons. While this was the position of the
English distiller, the consumption of Scotch spirits had in'
creased in his own market during the same period from
4,000,000 of gallons and upwards to nearly 6,000,000 of gal"
lons, and of Irish spirits, fiom 2,300,000 to 3,400,000 gallons.
These facts showed that the Scotch and Irish distillers had
no reason to complain of the Excise regulatiohs. Under
these circumstances he called upon the House not to dis-
turb the settlement which was come to in 1848. If they
should determine to grant the prayer of the Irish and Scotch
distillers, the colonial distiller, would immediately claim re'
lief to the same extent, and the struggle would probably end
in the abolition of the spirit duties altogether.
Mr. REYNOLDS said, the Honourable Gentleman who
bad just sat down had, referring to the Committee of 1848,
talked of a settlement and an arrangement.. He (111('' Reynolds) was not aware of any arrangement having been
come to, though he had paid much attention to the subject
at the time. There was, in feet, no Irishman either on that
Committee, nor examined as a witness before it; but by
way of reconciling them to the conclusions of the Com-
mittee, the Honourable Gentleman had stated that there
were two Scotchmen examined before it. Though he was
the great figure-Member—(A laugh)—put forward by the
Government, the Honourable Gentleman had failed, with all
his statistics, to convince him (Mr. Reynolds) that
they had
been fairly treated. Indeed, the Honourable Gentleman had
rather astonished him by quoting figures which only ex-
isted in his own fertile imagination. He had said, for in-
stance, that the loss from leakage in Ireland to the dis-
tiller was 11/ed.' and in Scotland 2 1-10 d. Why, an official
document which he (Mr Reynolds) held in his hand showed
that in the bonded warehouse in Dublin the total deficiency
by leakage and evaporation on twelve puncheons was 142
gallons, or 81/e per cent., instead of a penny and an
eighth. Again, with respect to the differential duty
of 4d., the Honourable Gentleman said that Id.
was allowed for plant, - %d. for another descrip-
tion of plant, and ld. for a third description of plant,
and the three together the Hon. Gentleman, with all his
power of figures, called 314 d., while it was only 2;Ad. The fact, however, was that 3id. was allowed for the greater cost
of the plant of the home manufacturer,
,as compared with
the foreign and colonial manufacturer, and id. for leakage
and evaporation. But to come to the real cause of com-
plaint—the Frenchman, the Portuguese, the Spaniard—in a
word, any foreigner might send his own wine, rum, or brandy
into any part of the United Kingdom, and have it bonded
in the Queen's stores for five or six years, and when he took
it out he paid duty only on the quantity and strength which
existed at the time of taking it out; but as to the Irish and
Scotch subjects of the realm, they paid a penalty amounting
in some cases to something very considerable. Far if a
lveeasks
ee
dl ,
hsaalyf t
hoaft Iq2uoa
ngfai
tlylonasn
da an d
evaporate 25 p edr
hcaelnf t.
of
iot
ay
strepnrgtoohf,
while in bond, the bonding party must pay a duty of 2s. ad.
per gallon in Ireland upon every
proof gallon which had
been
The lost, and which the vessel, therefore, did not contain.
question was not a spirit-dealer's; it was a question of
labour •it was an agricultural question—a question of the
profitable employment of the labour of the country. The
present was the third time they had tried this question; last
year they had been beaten by a majority of one, but he
trusted that that night they should have a considerable ma-
jority. He did not believe that any Irish Members would
vote against them. However they might differ, like other
men, on some other ques ions, on this he trusted they were all
agreed.

Mr. B. CARTER opposed the 'notion. If the Noble Lord's
(Lord Naas) views were carried out it would destroy the
distinction between Excise and Customs: the duty in the one
case being paid on consumption, in the other en production;
besides, it was asking an unfair advantage for the Scotch
and Irish distillers over the English distiller. If a case
had been made out for anything it was for a Committee up
stairs.

Mr. GROGAN reminded the House that the motion, if
as on
stood an ad-
the Iris and thteheEncagsleish as
well
from which they
shut out their own fellow-subjects. The Customs and Ex-
cisecl. e tl
Hon. Member for Westbury was ir c yat variance with
system ought to be identified. The argument of the
the evidence given before the Committee by Mr. Wood, who
stated that the differential duties between colonial and Bri-
tish sirits were just and right because of the peculiar charges
incident to Scotch and Irish spir A puncheon of foreign brandy was landed at Liverpool, where it remained five or
but not at the expense
e a r sim
importer,pro improvingo aonndl y mellowing,paid
o i
the time of paying the dut l
the
quantity of spirit at
y. A puncheon of whisky was also
bonded at Liverpool, but in the first place it paid a duty
on the decrease in taking it out of bond in Ireland, and then
osifxthye
came to England, and might be bonded, perhaps, in the same
store as the puncheon of French brandy. He assumed that
both decreased equally: but what was the position of the
owners? The Erenchinan took his brandy out, and paid
only on the quantity in the tack at that time; while the
Irishman or the Scotchrnan, in addition to paying on the de-
crease in his own con try, paid also on the deficiency occur-
ring after the time when his giods were bonded in England
at the high rate of the English duty. This was a fact which
could not be mystified whatever case might be made out by
figures. The Hon. Member for Westbury had endeavoured
to institute an invidious comparison as to the extent of trade
carried on with England by Ireland and Scotland; but the
truth was, that both Ireland and Scotland were suffering
from one common injustice, and now came to ask a remedy at
the hands of the House. The increase in the manufacture
to which allusion had been made would not remedy the evil,
but rather magnify it. The Hon. Member for Westbury had
referred to the number of gallons brought to charge as an
indication of prosperity; but he had always thought it.much
more beneficial to have a number of distillers distributed
throughout the country than to have all the business conso-
idated in the hands of a few large capitalists. All that the