The Sun.
London, England, 1851-05-06 00:00:00

MAY 6, 1851,

ROYAL MARINES.

ROYAL MARINE OFFICE. APRIL 30.—With reference
to the order in Coupcd, dated February 5, 1851, and
addressed to the several commandants of the Royal
Marines, directing that the 40 subalterns of the Artillery
companies of the Royal Marines should consist of two-
thirds first and one-third second lieutenants, an order
in Council, dated the 14th April, provides that those 10
companies are in future to bear 40 subalterns, irrespec-
tive of their rank of first lieutenants or second, it being
understood, however, that the proportion of the first
and second lieutenants in the whole corps shall remain
as at present—viz , two-thirds first and one-third second.
To give effect to this arrangement the following
named officers are to be forthwith transferred from the
Divisional to the Artillery companies:—First Lieute-
nants Edmund H. Cox, Nugent Macnamara, and Archi-
bald Alexander Douglas.

First Lieutenants W. P. Burton, G. 0. Pearce, and E.
D. Shelwall are to continue to serve as supernumeraries
with the Artillery companies until opportunity occurs
for their appointment, but hereafter officers in those
companies are, on being promoted, to join the head-
quarters of the division to which they shall be ap-
pointed, and have their names recorded for returning to
the Artillery branch of the corps according to seniority
as vacancies arise, should they wish to be so transferred.
(By command),
&nix OWEN, Deputy Adjutant-General.
The following gentlemen cadets have been appointed
second lieutenants of Royal Marines; commissions dated
April 29, 1851:—
Thomas John William Henry Rawlings to the Ports-
mouth, and Henry Swale to the Plymouth divisions.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought that
they were really getting into a discussion of the whole prin-
ciple under which Schedule B was to be framed. All these
questions were so linked t..gether, that it was impossible to
deal with tho one without considering the whole. Last
year the Noble Lord the Member for Stamford (the Marquis
of Granby) thought that the arrangement under Schedule
B was rather a fair one as regarded the farmers. His (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) opinion was, that it was a
favourable ground upon s hich to place the assessment of the
farmer. If a reduction was to take place at all, he thought
that it should be made in the rent and not upon the profits.
The tax calculated upon the rent would be reduced far more
than the tax upon the profits. Hon. Gentlemen seemed to
think that the circumstance of one particular year ought to
justify a change of the law in this respect. It was, however,
impossible to come to any conclusion in respect to the cir-
cumstances of any one particular year. He was sorry to see
what the feeling was on this particular subject. He did not
thi k that they would deal fairly in the matter unless they
considered the whole mode of assessment under Schedule B.
In his opinion it was better either to let the tax stand as it
was for one year, or to go into Committee upon the tax as a
whole.
Sir T. D. ACLAND said they might make the assessment
in the way proposed, but they ought to grant an appeal
from it to the farmers who complained of its injustice.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was
but fair, if they allowed this advantage on the one hand,
that they ought to be allowed on the other to impose the tax
upon those of the same class whose profits extended beyond
150 t. a year.
After a few observations from Colonel SIBTHORP,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
thought it was not quite fair that this discussion should be
raised on a question which had been withdrawn from pre-
sent consideration. The Bill should be left in its present
shape, and a Select Committee appointed to consider
whether any and what modifications might be made in the
law. Under these considerations he did not think it right
to suggest any alterations until that Committee was ap-
pointed. It was his interest as much as that of any other
person that that Committee should be appointed as speedily
as possible. Various questions might be raised which were
so interwoven one with another that it was impossible to dis-
cuss them apart.
Mr. HENLEY remarked that the case of the tenant-
farmers rested upon special grounds. The assessment upon
them was for three years, and that being so, he as sure no
one would have the hardihood to say that in the years 1849
and 1850 the tenant-farmers had made anything like the
sums for which they bad been assessed. During that time
the capital of many had been diminished at least 25 per
cent., and all•that was asked for now was, that there should
be some means of appeal to parties who had made no profits
last year, or in the present year, against their being assessed.
That was not an unreasonable thing to ask; and he was
sure the Right Hon. Gentleman would not tell them that
he could not hold out any hopes to a suffering class that
they would be permitted to escape from the injustice about to
be inflicted upon them.
Sir J. TROLLOPE said as far as regarded the tenant-
farmers, they could not permit the Government to have re-
course to the convenient mode that had now been suggested
of shelving this question. Unless some more satistac-ory
assurance were given than any that had yet been received
lie would e treat of the lion. Member for Warwickshire to
persevere with his motion. It was very convenient for a
Government to get rid of a question by referring it to a
Committee, and as a proof of this he would allure to what
had happened in the case of the Committee on Official
Salaries, which was appointed last session ; and yet:they had
arrived at the present period in the session without the Noble
Lord telling them what he intended to do in consequence of
it. He told tha Noble Lord that they would be compelled to
bring the subject of the tenant-farmers to an issue during the
present session.—( Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL did not consider that the Hon. Baronet
was very reasonable or very fair in his attack upon her Ma-
jesty's Government when he said that the appointment of a
Committee was a very convenient way for them to get rid of
a subject, as if it had been the intention of the Government
to propose any such Committee. The Government had op-
posed it with all their force—( Hear, hear)—and they had
u-ed against it every argument they could employ in the
hope of dissuading the House from adopting any such pro-
position.—(E-gear, hear.) And yet the Government having
done this, the Hun. Baronet charged them by saying that it
was a convenient mode for a Government to get rid of a diffi-
culty by app inting a Committee.—( Hear, hear.) There were
two courses which might have been fairly taken on this sub-
ject—the one was, to agree to the appointment cf a Com-
mittee to make an inquiry before the tax was imposed; and
the other, to discuss all the modifications which might be in-
troduced in a Committee of the whole House; and having
either agreed to or rejected these, then proceed with the
enactment of the tax. Either of these courses might
reas nably have beet. taken ; but now the Hon. Barone, pro-
posed, when there was to be an inquiry into all the matters
in a special Committee, with a re-enactment of the tax for
another year, the case of the tenant-farmers as a special case,
and one that should have the advantage of special exemptions.
Why, if this were done for one particular class— if the House
agreed thus to exempt one particular class—what would be
more reasonable than for traders and manufacturers tcecome
before them and to say that in the years 1847 and 1848 they
had been obliged to pay on three years' returns, when they
were, in fact, making no profits?—(Hear.) In fact, if they
made an exemption in favour of one class, they must make
it for another, and they would thus involve themselves in
endless discussions. As it was the wish of the House that a
Committee should be appointed, he hoped they would now
consent to renew the tax.—(Hear.) But the Hon. Baronet
had charged him with not having stated his views respect-
ing the report of the Committee on official salaries. He had
already mentioned, that on going into the first Committee
of Supply, it was his intention to state what course be
meant to adopt on the subject, and he held at the moment
the report of the Committee on Official Salaries in his hand,
and was prepared then to state to the House his views re-
specting it.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE observed that his vote the other night
was that the income-tax should I e for one year, instead of
three years.—( Hear, hear.) His vote had nothing to do
with the appointment of a tiommittee.—(Hear, hear.) His
vote was a vote with respect to the duration of the income-
tax.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord the other evening had been
pleased to be facetious with respect to the Protectionists;
he bad told them that they did not march in time, nor fire
their muskets in order. Ha believed that the Noble Lord
had by this time discovered that they steadily maintained
their ground, that they marched with a firm step, and that
in their muskets there was something more than blank
powder. ( Hear, and laughter.)
Mr. DISRAELI considered the Noble Lord was under a
misconception when he supposed that those on his (Mr.
Disraeli's) side of the House had voted for the motion of re •
faring the income-tax to a Committee.—(Hear, (sear.) He
understood that a Committee to inquire into the income-tax
was a Government proposition. (Hear, hear.) If it were
not he was labouring under a mistake. He did not know
what was the intention of others; but this he said, that
if a Committee had been prop sod, he should pro-
bably have taken a different course from that
which he had adopted. He certainly had no official in-
formation as to the appointment of a Committee until he
heard the Noble Lord propose it that night.—(Hear, hear.)
He certainly had been very inc edulous when the fact was
first mentioned, and when he was told that such a course
would be taken he said that he did not think that it would,
because there was the Kafir Committee—( Hear) —it had not
yet n•ported ; and he conceived th re would be a difficulty
in naming a Committee.—( Hear.) The proposition of the
Hon. Member for Warwickshire was virtually introduced in
that of his Hon. and Gallant Friend the Member for Lincoln,
and th refore be would suggest to the Noble Lord, when he
came down to the House with such an unusual proposition
as he had made that night, and which was not very favour-
ably received, that ne should now move that the Chairman
should report, so as to enable his Hon. and Gallant Friend
to bri g forward his proposition; and then, too, his Noble
Friend could inform them as to what further business he
proposed to proceed with that night.—(Hear.)
Lord J. RUSS- LL rem arked that the Hon. Gentleman
had ass,rted that he (Lord J. Russell) had entirely mis-
taken the view with which the Hon. Member for Montrose
proposed his motion ; that his views were the same as the
views of the Hon. Gentleman; that he was entirely in error
in saying that the proposition of his Hon. Friend was incon-
sietent with the grounds on which it had been supported
by the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire. In this case he
was in the recollection of the House, and nothing could be
more easy than to ascertain whether what he had stated was
in accordance with the recorded views of the Hon. Member
for Montrose - (Hear.) Tile Hon. Member for Buckingham-
shire said that the proposition fur a Committee was one of
which the House had never heard before; that he was
taken by surprise by its proposition, and yet what was the
Hon. Gentleman's motion ? It was not, of course, put in
full, but these were the terms in which it was made, "to
move to limit the duration of the tax to one year, with a
view of instituting an inquiry, by a Select Committee, into
the mode of assessing and collecting the tax."—(Hear, hear.)
And yet, with these words before him, the Hon. Gentleman
had repeatedly declared that he had the same views on this
subject with his Hon. Friend; and yet now told them that
he only supposed his Hon. Friend was for merely limiting
the duration of the tax to one year.—(Hear.) He now
asked whether or not he was satisfied in supposing that, in
the adoption of the motion of his Honourable Friend, the
House assented to the ap. ointment of a Committee.
The Government had now adopted that proposition, and
now, when it was wished to move that the Chairman should
report progress, he at once declared that the Government
could not accede to any such proposition. • (Hear) In ac-
ceding to the wishes of the House that which he did on due
deliberation, and not without the consent of his colleagues,
he trusted to find the House prepared to meet the tax for one
year, so as to enable them to carry out measures that were
necessary for the public credit.
Mr. DISRAELI said, that so far was the proposition of
the Hon. Member for Montrose from being put to the House
in the terms stated by the Noble Lord, that he found this
motion was in the business paper for that very evening:—
" Mr. Hume —To move to limit the duration of the tax to
one year, with the view of instituting an inquiry by a Select
Committee into the mode of assessing and collecting the tax ;
and whether the injustice of levying the same rate of charge
upon terminable as upon perpetual annuities, and upon fluctu-
ating and varying inc mes from trades and professions as upon
fixed incomes from real prooerty, cannot be greatly modified
or altogether removed." This showed the motion was not
yet made. (Cheers.) And what was more, the Bon. Memo
h ioerbtloonitt.rose
Buth he adneevxecrurseeaddthaerNesoobluieord• as no doubttioz• and had never
referred d
after what occurred the Noble Lord was under excited feel-
ings.—(L iughter.) But what he rose for was, was for the
purpose of saying
that the proposition of the Hon. and Gal-
lant Member for Lincoln was a fair proposition, and he would
suggest to the Hon. Member for Warwickshire not to press
his motion for the present, so that on bringing up the report
the Hon. Member for Lincoln might bring forward what he
had to submit to the House as a substantive motion.
Mr. HUME said that having been referred to, he felt
bound to state that he had declared that if he carried his mo-
tion for one year, then he would move for a Committee.
These were his words; and to carry out that intention he had
given the notice which was on the paper, for the purpose of
moving the Committee to-morrow.
Dlr. NEWDEGATE understood the motion of the
Member for Montrose as he had stated it, and that it was
his intention to move for a Committee. At the same time he
bad no hope from a Committee ; for he remembered Sir R.
Peel declaring that it was impossible to levy a tax without
doing injustice. As to the tenant farmers, be reminded the
Right lion. Gentleman the Chancedor of the Exchequer
that he had admitted they were entitled to specific relief—
that he had even made a proposition to that effect, which he
had subsequently withdrawn—that he proposed a remission
of 30,0001. for seeds, and to transfer 150,000/. from the rates
to the Consolidated Fund. But was the Noble A.ord sure
that if relief were granted the traders and manufacturers
might ask for a remission for losses sustained in 1847 and
1848? The Noble Lord forgot that in 1847 and 1848, if
such losses were sustained, traders, merchants, and manu-
facturers had a power of appeal given to them—that which
was denied to the tenant-farmers. (Hear.)
Mr. SPOONER agreed that the motion ought to be
brought forward
by the Hon and Gallant Member for Lin-
coln, and be, t herwore, should not press his motion.
Captain HARRIS distinctly protested against the notion
that in voting as he did on Friday night he was voting for a
Committee. To appoint a Committee was to propose to
make the tax MUMMA to appoint Counittco