The Sun.
London, England, 1851-04-12 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, April 11.
LAW OF EVIDENCE AMENDMENT BILL.
Lord BROUGHAM moved the second reading of
the Bill to amend the law of evidence. This Bill pro-
posed to admit parties interested in the ea use to give
evidence in civil cases. It had been decided by the
courts of law that a party was excluded from giving evi-
dence only by having an interest in the event of the suit;
that point had been settled by the decision of the Court
of Common Pleas, when presided over. by Chief
Justice Tindal, in the case of Worrell w. Jones. Since
then the evidence of persons having an interest was
admitted under the provisions of Lord Denman's Act,
passed in 1843. The Bill which he now proposed was
merely a corollary of Lord Denman's Act; since that
Act bad passed the County Courts Act had passed, and in
every cause tried under that Act the parties to the suit
were examined, and in the majority of instances they
had been examined. He proposed to extend this provis
sion to all cases. It had been said that this provision
would be an encouragement to perjury—(Hear, hear)
—but the refusal of such an enactment was
a temptation to subornation of perjury, and there were
not a few reasons to show that witnesses tendered by
parties were much more likely to commit perjury than
the parties themselves. No one could be better acquainted
with the case than the parties themselves, and under
cross-examination the perjury of such persona was much
more likely to be discovered than that of a bsuborned
witness. Again, how many persona were there who
would have a scruple at foreswearing themselves who
would not scruple to suborn others. Again, how often
did not partial witnesses give a colour to transactions
who would not commit the foul crime of perjury.
Again, the man who committed perjury in support of his
own case would make much greater shipwreck of his
character than the man who should give exaggerated
evidence as a zealous partisan. But those who opposed
the principle seemed to forget in how many instances
they already admitted the testimony of parties, both in
affidavits before a court of common law, and in answers
to interrogatories in the Court of Chancery. le both
these cases there was far more real &Anger of false
swearing than in viva voce examinations, and be-
sides there was sure to be concealment of truth—almost
as great a moral crime; for the party swearing was not
sworn to tell " the whole truth," but only that what he
swore was the truth. He considered that it depended
on the principle of the form of the prooeecEng whether
it was right that the litigant parties should be examined.
Should an action for assault or battery be brought into a
civil court for damages, the plaintiff is not at present ad-
mitted as evidence, whereas, if he happens, to be de-
feated in the one court, he can have recourse) to the cri-
minal court, and then he alone can give evidence, as the
Crown is the prosecutor; and thus the plaint if may, on
his own testimony, convict his adversary. He did not
mean that a system that is irreconcileable with one
court should be admitted in another. He should now
refer to the testimony of some very eminent and ex-
perienced men in favour of hisSopinionu. Mr. Ad-
dison Who was a judge in the county courts in the north
of Lancashire, a gentleman of some nine or ten years'
experience in those courts, gave it as his testimony, that
there was no apprehension of perjury taking- place, and
that it was wrong that an examination of the parties on
the grounds of perjury should take place, as such did not
often occur. He (Mr. Addison) gave several cases dur-
ing his experience, when the defendants did nut plead a
denial on oath, and that out of 64 cases, consisting only
of the plaintiff and defendant, that came under his in-
vestigation, 87 were decided in favour of t net defendant,
and 37 for the plaintiff, and such did not ocour through
the examination of the parties. Mr. Docking, chairman
of the county courts, for forming a system for them; Mr.
Childers, another chairman of county courts, and Mr.
Gale, county courts judge of Hampshire; Prof essor Amos,
of the University of Cambridge, who had bes3n for many
years the Recorder of Oxford, and afterwards of Cam-
bridge, a gentleman distinguished alike fo r his eru-
dition and legal acumen; all these distinguiahed lawyers
were strongly in favour of such a mode of proceeding.
He did not think that he need go further, any more
thansthat he thought it unjust and unfair that in the
case of a difference between merchants or other em-
ployers, the proprietor, as plaintiff, would not be per-
mitted,jhough his evidence might be most potent in fur-
thering the ends of justice, whilst his servants end others
who could not clearly elucidate the case, svere. admitted
as evidence, very frequently to the prej adice of their
masters. He considered that it would be most invaluable
to admit the testimony of the masters. No whe would
ask, was it not equally right that such plain tiffs should
be heard in the high courts as well as its the county
courts, for he believed that there would be greater secu-
rity in the supreme courts, as the case would be tried
before a jury and an experienced judge, who would di-
rect, instruct, and superintend the jury in .cases of diffi-
culty, and be felt assured that there would be no appre-
hension of perjury or bribery before such a ,tribunal. He
would add that it was much more probable that perjury
would take place in the county courts than in the su-
preme courts. He then moved the second reading.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that he had no ob-
jection to the second reading of the Bill, but ho should
say that he considered that those who knew most of the
proceedings of the supreme courts were the fit test persons
to examine all matters appertaining to such proceedings.
He should say, from his experience, that ehe Adminis-
tration of justice would be best promoted and facilitated
by the parties being examined.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
He looked upon the judges of Westminster-hall as the
most suitable persons to entertain those proceedings, and
not the judges of the county courts, who wore not so ca-
pable for the examination of the litigant parties. He
also thought that it would be judicious that each side
should put interrogatories to the adversary, for fre-
quently the most able counsel would influence a jury;
and, in addition to that, a false witness often deceives a
jury by the manner he details his testimony. He be-
lieved that the Legislature had taken a long stride in
favour of the Bill. There was another nuttier which he
looked upon as a very important one, and that was, that
by the present Bill the wife could be coerced to come into
court to give evidence against her husband. Such a
course he looked upon as very unjust, because by it do-
mestic confidence would be risked to a very great extent.
Ho hoped that their Lordships would not support that
clause of the Bill, and he intended when the Bill went
into committee to move the rejection of that clause.
Lord BROUGHAM said that he did noe see why the
wife should not be brought into the higher courts as
well as in the county courts, where the wife could
be brought witness against the husband for a sum
under 501.

Lord CAMPBELL said that he wis'ned to see the
maxim always upheld, namely, that the wife should not
be examined against the husband. As it was in common
law so should it be in Chancery. It was a disgrace to
the 'administration of justice that parties should now go
to the Court of Chancery in quest of having their
claims sanctioned, while before that could be done they
were sent back to the courts of equity, and had to go
through an interminable course of litigation, so that in
many oases years rolled on before their case was decided.
He considered that, the measure now proposed was a
movement in the right direction, and, while he objected
to some of its details, he must give his support to the
second reading of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord CR ANWORTH also supported the second
reading of the Bill, and confessed that, in his opinion,
Jeremy Bentham was right when he said that, were
the wife examined in cases affecting her husband, in
five cases out of six no other witnesses would be re-
quired.
After a few words from Lord BROUGHAM, the Bill
was read a second time.
• Their Lordships then adjourned.

ROUSE OF COMMONS, April 11.
ASSESSED TAXES ACT..

On the motion that the Speaker do leave the chair,
Mr. BANIES wished to know whether the Chancellor
of the Exchequer had yet made up his mind upon what
principle he meant to
ascertain the assessment for the
house-tax?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that the rating would be made on the annual value of the
house, to be ascertained a 3 it best could be.
Mr. DISRAELI then said—l proceed now to the
consideration of the amendment of which I have given
notice, on the motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer. Sir, the manner in which
the Government, and I may say, in a certain degree, the
House of Commons, have considered the position of the
agricultural interest of this country since the meeting—
since the commencement of the session o f Parliament,
appears to me so perplexing and so contradictory—so
wanting, I may say, in consistency—seemingly influenced
so much by a spirit, however unintentional, of injustice—
tending so much, I think, to hurt the feelings, shake the
confidence, and offend the jut and honest pride of a
very important portion of her Majesty's subjects—
tilat I 111,ufett, Sir, bourn the ajutionatem of the Ilouse,
before we wect back to our constituents, I would make
an effort to induce the House and the Government dis-
passionately to consider, and after a fair discpssion, influ.

enced, as I unsure it will be, only by a desire to arrive at a
just and true conclusion, to induce them to adopt that
opinion which I have expressed in the resolution which
I shall put into your hands, and which I believe to be
dictated by a principle of justice and sincere feeling
of sympathy and conciliation.—(Hear, hear, and
cheers.) The suffering and distress of the owners and
occupiers of land have for a considerable time occupied
the attention and consideration (and naturally too the
consideration) of Government—as the admissions by
confession, and expressions which were continued for
several sessions in the speeches of her Majesty's Minis-
ters; but it was only this year that the Government, no
doubt seeing the gravity of the circumstances, felt it to
be their duty to counsel her Majesty in her most
gracious Speech from the Throne, publicly and authori-
tatively, to recognise and deplore the existence and con-
tinuance of these difficulties. Sir, lam far from pre-
suming to blame her Majesty's Ministers for not having
counselled her Majesty on previous occasions to have
made an acknowledgment which then would have been
only a just one, for I am aware that it is no light re-
sponsibility which is incurred by a Government when
they counsel the Sovereign to acknowledge the distress
of an important interest in this country. No doubt
that such a recognition raises, and naturally raises, the
expectations of the community that the acknowledgment
will be followed by a remedy. It is difficult to under-
stand what can authorise Government in a manner so
public and so authoritative to call the attention of Par-
liament and the country, I may say even of the world,
to the condition of a class, unless they felt that that
condition was pregnant with important conse-
quences to the whole community, and unless they
wished to prepare Parliament and the country for the
undertaking of measures which should at least attempt
to mitigate, if not remove, the distress which they de.
plore.—(Cheers.) After that important act—after the
meeting of Parliament and the Speech from the Throne,
when expectations had naturally and unusually been ex-
cited, not only throughout the country generally, but
particularly amongst that class that were suffering, and
whose sufferings, difficulties, and distress, after the re-
cognition of them by the Throne, were no longer a
theoretical evil, no longer a question of doubt, but a
! great political fact, a Parliamentary consequence, to
which the political council of the country was called
upon to address their attention—(Hear)—the First Lei.
baiter of the Crown said to this House while he de-
plored with well-expressed sympathy, and in tones
almost of despair, the distress which existed, confessed
to the House of Commons that he was unprepared and
unable to propose any remedy.—(Hear.) What, Sir,
was the conduct of this House under those circum-
stances ? Duly respecting and appreciating the commu-
nication from the Throne, and astonished at the confes-
sion of the Minister which followed it, the House felt it
to be its duty to interpose, and a discussion of great
gravity and considerable length occurred.—(Hear.)
A proposition wns made in this House expressing its
opinion that under the circumstances of the case, and.
after such an acknowledgment, and in consequence of
the existence of such distress and difficulties, it was the
duty of the Minister to introduce a remedial measure
which the circumstances of the case re quired, and
which the acknowledgment of the Crown rendered in-
evitable, as it seemed to us.—(Cheers.) What was
the result of this motion? In one of the fullest Houses of
the session that expression of opinion was negatived by a
majority so small—(Hear, bear)—that upon a subse-
quent occasion the Prirhe Minister of the Crown con-
fessed that the result of that division shook the Govern-
ment to its centre.—(Cheers.) Indeed he intimated that
it was, if not the proximate, the real cause of the disso-
lution of the Cabinet and breakup of Government,—
(Cheers.) Thus far, on considering the events of the
session, we observe, that the Crown, under the advices
of the Government, has recognised the extreme distress
of the agricultural classes of tho community, and at the
same time that Government, not coming forward to fulfil
as it were the implied intentions of the Crown, the House
of Commons stepped in; and although it did not for-
mally obtain on the part of the Government an agree-
ment, still there was a favourable expression of opinion
that it was the duty of Government so to interpose. And
interpose the Government did, because, when within
forty-eight hours of that division it, became the duty of
the Chancellor of the Exchequer to make his financial
statement for the year, he made a proposition of two
measures, the object of which was to mitigate the die.
tress of the owners and occupiers of !sad—(Oh, oh, and
Flear,thear)—proving, therefore, that the interposition of
the House had created the necessary harmony that was
requisite in the Ministry—(Laughter)—and that the
recognition of the distress of the owners and occu-
piers of land made by the Crown was now likely
to be followed up by measures proposed by the Go-
vernment to mitigate, if not remove, that distress.—
(flea-.) I enter at this point into no controversy on the
amount of the possible relief to be afforded; all I wish to
remind the House of is, that after Government had de-
clared it was not in their power to propose any measure
to mitigate the distress, the House of Commons ex.
pressed their opinion, and immediately afterwards a pro-
position is made with the object of mitigating those dif-
ficulties.—(Hear, hour.) Sir, the financial statement of
the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer met with a reception which was extremely un-
favourable. lam bound to say, speaking, as I shall
continue to do in all I shall have to say that which I be-
lieve to be really true, that as fir as the quarters from
which that opposition principally emanated, I think the
obloquy which the scheme of the Right Hon. Gentleman
met with was unjust. I think that although in his finan-
cial statement, so far as my own views and principles
and those of the gentlemen with whom I have the plea-
cure of acting are concerned, these views are not fa-
voured; yet so far as those who are supporters of the
Right lion. Gentleman aro concerned, I think they had
very little cause to impugn and find fault with what was
proposed. It was in accordance with the principles of
the Government and of those who are its general sup-
porters. But having made that admission, of which the
Right Hon. Gentleman may make as much use as he
likes, he is himself the last man in this House who will
deny that his financial scheme was blamed by his friends
in a manner not very flattering to a Minister of Finance.
—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) There was a great out-
cry in the country, especially in the towns, against the
Budget of the Right Hon. Gentleman.—(clear, hear.)
There is hardly any term of vituperation, any epithet of
obloquy which was not showered on the luckless Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer.—(Laughter.) He was abused,
he was denounced, he was described as the Jonah that
ought to be thrown into the surging waves to save the
other passengers on board the vessel.—(Laughter.) In-
deed it was generally understood by all the Members of
the Liberal party, and declared by them, that they were
ready to make any sacrifices to support the Government,
but that a sine qua non of their adhesion was that the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer should never appear again behind that red box.—
(Cheers and laughter.) But, together with this general
dissent, there was also that which I must describe as
the metropolitan howl—a peculiar outcry, which has its
characteristics, which threatens a great deal, but does
very little.—(Laughter.) It does not carry Reform Bills
like Birmingham, nor corn-laws repeal like Manchester
—(Laughter)—which always deports itself in the most
alarming manner, and which always commences by say-
ing " Stop the supplies," and ends by supporting the
Minister.—(Laughter.) But, Sir, if this is the state of
the urban community, if this is the manner and spirit in
which the propositions of the Government were wel-
comed in the country, what was the manner in which
another proposition for alleviating the distress and
assisting the difficulties of the agricultural class
was received?—(Hear, hear.) Sir, on the evening
of the financial statement of the Right Honourable
Gentleman, when he was denounced by his intimate
supporters, and attacked by his most confidential adhe-
rents—(Hear and laughter)—the Right Hon. Member
for Stamford (Mr. Herries), who took the lead on this
side in the observations offered during that discussion,
made no allusion whatsoever to the measure brought for-
ward for the relief of agricultural distress. If I speak of
myself, my mouth was silent all through, for I took no
part in the debate. Two other county Members made
some reference to the proposition of the Government.
One of them was the Hon. Member for Oxford, who no-
ticed the proposition of the Minister indeed, but, with
his characteristic caution, gave no opinion on the sub-
ject; the other was the worthy Baronet the Member for
Essex, who shrewdly accepted the proposition, because
it seemed to involve the concession of an important prin-
ciple. This was the reception which the Right lion.
Gentleman's statement met at this side of the House,
and as for its reception with the agricultural community
out of the House, certainly there would be some diffi-
culty in selecting any terms of panegyric—(Laughter)
—in which it might be spoken of, but this even the
Right Hon. Gentleman himself could not have antici-
pated—(Hear, hear)—but I think I may defy even the
powers of research of the Treasury to bring forward any
expression of blame.—(Hear, hear.) It was indeed con-
sidered insignificant, but so little was expected from
the present Ministers, that there was not even any
great disappointment on the part of that class of the
community which were prepared to receive any
substantial measure with contentment and grati-
tude. Such being the state of things considerable
events occurred. Thera occurred a Ministerial crisis.
The public business was arrested and suspended for
nearly six weeks. I threw a veil over that chaotic pe-
riod which has nothing to do with the circumstance to
which I am now calling the attention of the House. But
after that interval of agitation and anarchy the House
of Commons, having recovered its usual sobriety of tone,
was naturally very anxious to receive the financial
statement of the Minister. Great difficulty was expe-
rienced in arriving at this, and efforts were made on
both sides of the House, and by various contending
sections representing all views and shades of opinion, to
procure this statement. But after almost convulsive
efforts on the part of the Government to avoid any ex-
planation, the day was fixed—the House assembled—
and the explanation was made.—(Hear, hear.) Great
anticipations existed in the public mind and in this
House that there would be a considerable alteration in
the scheme of the Minister. The Hon. Gentleman, who
had described the Chancellor of the Exchequer as Jonah
—(Laughter)—and others with him, naturally felt some
awkwardness in supporting the same Budget which they
had thus coarsely denounced. We were all waiting in
great expectation. I give great credit to the Right Hon.
Gentleman that under the circumstances of the case ho
mainly adhered to the financial scheme which he ori-
ginally proposed. It showed that moral courage on his
part which both sides of the House must admire—
(Hear, and laughter)—but what surprised me most
was, that in the alterations made, the only persons
considered were those who had declared the Right Hon.
Gentleman unworthy of all confidence, and they were
considered at the expense of that party which had at
least treated him with the courtesy and the respect due
to his eminent position.—(Hear, hear.) On that occa-
sion the Rieht Hon. Gentleman, on re-adjusting his
ecneme fur we repeat wi-ach required
greater funds than had been originally at his disposal,
found this resource in a quarter unexpected, and in a
manner unprecedented. The Eight Hon. Gentleman

APRIL l2, 1851.

wanted some 200,0001. more than his original plan do-
mended, and what does he do? He takes up his pen end
scratches out the two remedial measures intended to
mitigate and assist the difficulties of the suffering land-
owners of England, and then he gives for his reason that
the proposition was received in such an ungracious man-
ner, ho will now show his sense of our want of grati-
tude. I have always thought, Sir, that Ministerial
propositions in this House wore the result of grave
counsel and the mature deliberation of Cabinet confi-
dence and communication; that they were suggested by
a sense of public duty; by taking an unimpassioned sur-
vey of public circumstances; that they were not brought
forward in levity or merely to gain party support; nor,
on the other hand, were they to be withdrawn from
any feeling of personality, nor in a tone of flippant ca-
price.—(Hear.) But what remains? The fact is, that
we were as guilty of ungraciousness who were only silent.
Recollect that that which was proposed by Government
as a consequence of mature counsel, as a matter called
for by a sense of public duty, was withdrawn on the
plea of our ungraciousness, and was extended to that—
I will not say adverse—interest, which had been parti-
cularly distinguished for the mean and almost indecorous
manner in which they treated the financial statement of
the Minister. The Right Hon. Gentleman had no right
to expect gratitude from us. He had done very little
for us—and if it was received without any demonstra-
tion of practical gratitude, he had no right to be as-
tonished. But according to his own notions he ex-
pected differently, although they who spurned him and
his Budget were treated with additional favours; while
we, who treated his suggestions with respect, had our
claims to consideration depreciated, mol had it an-
nounced in the face of the House of Commons that if
we had any claim it had been forfeited by our disre-
spectful conduct.—(Hear, hear.) But them are slight
considerations, though important in a certain sense—for
all this time remember that the interest suffering is that
which the Government are every night admitting to be
the only suffering one in the community, the interest of
which they counselled their Sovereign to recognise
the distress. Yet it is proposed to extend that which
is taken from us to a portion of the community which
we are every night informed is in a condition of unpa-
ralleled prosperity.—(Haar. hoar.) I beg Hon. Gentle-
men at either side of the House dispassionately to con-
sider the circumstances at which we have arrived, and
the incidents which have occurred in this short but
eventful session. 13 it not true that the circumstances I
have detailed are an accurate narrative of what has cc-
curred?—(Elear, hear.) Is it not true that the distress
which prevailed in one particular class was announced
and noticed in the Speech from the Throne, and that
the First Minister of the Crown, notwithstanding the
expectation raised by that announcement, acknowledged
to Parliament that ho can do nothing to remedy that
distress? Is it not true that Cie House of Commons in-
terferes to assert that this remedy should be prepared?
Is it not true that, forty-eight hours after, the Govern-
ment brings in a Budget in which no remedied measures
ore contained? and is it not equally true that this
Budget is withdrawn, and another substituee into
which remedial measures are admitted (Hear,
hear.) I would ask any men of sense and honour,
can they sanction a course of proceeding as unjust as
inconsistent, ? Is this a line of cenduet which tends to
establish confidence in a certain class ? Is it one which
necessarily offends the feelings of that portion of the
community, and leads them to believe that their claims
aro not viewed in that spirit of justice which ought
to prevail amongst all classes of the community? I would
ask, has anything occurred in the condition of the
owners and occupiers of land since Parliament met
which makes any difference of opinion as to their con-
dition? No one can say there is any such. There is
no doubt, whatever may be the cause—whatever opinions
may be held of the expediency or tee necessity of the
legislation which occasioned it—no man in this House
will deny that the owners and occupiers of land in the
United Kingdom are in a state of unprecedented diffi-
culty,—(Flear, hear.) Look at the main features of the
case. You have a diminution of rents, which we are
informed may be taken at the rate of 10 per cent. IA
" More."] I am told more. I will say, however,
a diminution of rents to the amount of 10 per cent. I
do not know whether it is more, but I know it will soon
be more.—(Hear, hear.) Tele° the rental of the United
Kingdom at a moderate computation—at, say 60,000,000/.,
as that amount is accepted by the most eminent statists.
Well, here you have a loss to one class of 6,000,0001.
I do not say that this is a sufficient ground on which to
come forward and ask Parliament for relief. This is not
the point I stn going to put before the House. You
have, and will have, it continued diminution of rents;
but I must remind the House that at a certain period
the diminution of rent ceases to be a mere loss to
the proprietor of the lend; for when you have ae•
complished a diminution of twenty-five per cent,, you
have, by an unnerriog law of economics, thrown
certain lands out of cultivation—your cold clays
and your thin land can never be brought into
cultivation on a diminution of 25 per cent. Now, I
will not say that any such diminution affords per se the
slightest claim for any class to come to this House to
ask for relief. But I mu not of that school which looks
upon any diminution of rent as an abstract accession to
the naeional prosperity.—(Hear, hoer,) And this you
will ail admit, that a diminution of rent, even to the
amount of 10 per cent., or 6,000,0001. a year, is a cir-
cumstance which has a tendency to create distress among
the class which has to endure it.—(Hear, hear.) Let us
look first to the case of the occupiers of land. I shall
take a very moderate estimate of the amount of capital
invested in the sell by the farmers of the United King-
dom before that change in the law which has occasioned
this diminution of their capital. I shall take the whole
amount of the capital of the farmers of the United Kind-
dom at that which has often been stated, and by very
eminent authorities too, as the amount ef the capital in-
vested in the soil by the farmers of England alone. I
shall take the amount of the capital invested in the soil
by the farmers of the United Kingdom at the time when
the repeal of the corn-laws took place at only
300,000,000/. Now a third of that has disappeared.
I do not mean to say that that circumstance alone con-
stitutes a good reason why the farmers of the United
Kingdom should come to this House for relief ; but
it is indubitable evidence that the class which
has undergone such a vicissitude of fortune must
necessarily be in a state of greet distress and difficulty.—
(Hear, hear.) We cannot suppose that since that pub-
lic recognition of that distress and difficulty was made
by her Mejesty in her most gracious Speech, and more
especially as that recognition was not made until the
suffering had become chronic—we cannot suppose that
anything had occurred, or that anything is likely to
occur, to remedy that evil. Well, then, I think I have
established this position, that if her Majesty's Ministers
are in the happy position of having at their disposal a
surplus revenue—if, as they themselves admit, there is
only one, although a most important, class in this coun-
try suffering great distress at this moment—if all other
classes are in a state of unprecedented prosperity, it
surely became her Majesty's Ministers to consider
whether, if they had resolved on a distribution of that
surplus in the way of remissions of taxes, it eves not in
their power to propose such remissions as might alleviate
the distress and mitigate the suffering of that class.—
(Hear, hear.) And now I have to consider whether it
was in the power of her Majesty's Government to pro-
pose in the construction of their Budget any measures
which would have that tendency. I must admit that I
have considerable advantages—such as seldom fall to
the lot of a Member of this House speaking from the
Opposition side—in arguing that point. Her Ma-
jesty's Ministers cannot call upon me, although the
task were but too easy a one, to substantiate the
statement that distress exists.—(Hear, hear.) They
have themselves given the most authoritative evidence
upon that head; and it must have been after frequent
councils—after profound deliberations—after lengthened
and mature researches—that they counselled her Ma-
jesty to make that declaration to the country.—(Hear,
hear.) And, therefore, it were hardly necessary for me
to advert to these great statistical facts, which, never-
theless, with the indulgence of the House, I shall briefly
allude to. I have another great advantage upon this oc-
casion. I might under ordinary circumstances have been
asked even if her Majesty's Government admitted the
distress as they did on the first night of the session—l
might have been asked by her Majesty's Ministers,
" What can we do?" But I can hardly be asked that
upon this occasion, because her Majesty's Ministers have
themselves in this session proposed measures to remedy
those evils—(Hear, hoar)—have themselves, after due
deliberation, of course, proposed measures to the House
—lhe efficiency or inefficiency of which may be matters
for future controversy and discussion; but the great fact
remains, that they have themselves, after having deli-
berated on the sufferings of the owners and occupiers of
land, devised schemes for the relief of those sufferings.
—(Hear, hear.) Those are very great advantages—dis-
tress admitted by the Crown, nay, announced by
the Crowe, and remedial plans not only suggested,
but proposed by the Government. Happy interest !
which finds itself in such a position.—(Hear, hear,
and laughter.) Well, we have at once a
measure—and it is the first measure to which I shall
refer—we have at once a measure, the object of which is
to relieve this distress, and which to a certain degree, in
the opinion of the Government, is efficient for that pur-
pose. It is the opinion of her Majesty's Ministers—and
it is the only one of their proposals which I shall pro-
ceed to consider—that it is desirable, or rather that it
was desirable, that the expense incurred by the owners
and occupiers of land in the maintenance of pauper lu-
natics should be borne by the community which is
generally interested in that subject, and that the tendency
of such a measure, if it were adopted, would be to afford
relief to the agricultural interest. In the making that
suggestion her Majesty's Ministers acted on a recom-
mendation in the report of the Lords Committee on the
burdens upon land. That temperate, painstaking, and
thoughtful Committee, the business of which was con-
ducted by men consisting of both parties, and second to
none in either House of Parliament in their knowledge
of the rural life and inter ests of England—
many of whom were warm supporters of those prin-
ciples of political economy which regulate our present
commercial legislation—that Committee gave it as their
opinion that the charge for pauper lunatics was one
which ought to be removed from the land, and borne
by the community at large. Her Majesty's Ministers,
atter having deliberated on that suggestion, made
a proposition to the House of a partial character,
but completely recognising the
principle of the Com-
mittee of the House of Lords, and brought forward that
proposition as one the tendency of which was to mitigate
this distress and to remove this depression. Well, then,
we have a practical measure before the House for this
object—no matter what may be the amount of the con-
cession or its degree of efficiency—we have a practical
measure introduced by the Government, after due de-
liberation. I do not myself consider that that proposi-
tion of her Majesty's Ministers was by any means to be
&seised I ,Vr:e with is floneureble Friend the
Member for Essex (e .r J. Tyrell) that it conceded a
great principle•, and I myself, on a subsequent occasion
reminded the Right Honourable Gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Bxehe quer of that fact; but the Right acla.

do
,a
Gentleman misunderstood the tendency of my ob
tions. I valued the admission of a principle Made 1
that proposition of the Government, not
would found upon that circumstance a precedent, l_°_,
removing from real property, and more especially trf6
the hind, the administration of the local taxation of
the
country, or, rather, the local administration of ,
se
country. There is nothing I more deprecate, or wial'flt'
I should more deplore, than a removal of ew,,,
local administration, and such a course I Oa
never advocated.—(Hear, hear.) What I valued c
loccause,l
that that was an admission that the local taxation,
which is a consequence of that local ndministration, ro:.
a peculiar burden upon a particular kind of PreV is
That was the admission which I valued as embodiedn.
the proposal of her Majesty's Ministers, and that slat
sion might have led us to the consideration of some poeto.o ri
,61,
important circumstances, into which, however, I
think it necessary to enter upon this occasion. "la
medert.
now, I have placed before the House one very
but eminently and essentially practical measure, the,.t!,,l'e
dency of which would be to alleviate the distress of ''r
agricultural interest; and here I must observe 040
wish to confine myself solely to a consideration of ,`„
overwhelming difficulties which are now experienced `;'„
the occupiers of the soil.—(Hear, hear.) This is ti Inepd
sure, mind you, that has been sanctioned and al'Preve'a
of by the Government, that has been submitted to 01316
examination, to their mature deliberation, and that the
been introducer' to the notice of Parliament under 'ea
most remarkable circumstances. These circurnstaefi,
prove how deeply they must have considered the nrat'eli;
and how anxious they must have been to arrive at e6b.
tiefactory conclusion with respect to it, because, dereel)f
convinced as they were of the distress of the occupiers
the soil, end notwithstanding the admissions of the Crew,
upon the subject, they had themselves declared their;as
ability to suggest a remedy for that distress, and ita
not until after a declaration of opinion on the part I
the House of Commons that they were induced te,e"el
their ingenuity to work in the matter.—(Hear, hear'id •
shall now remind the House of another measure, to
old
rate in its character, but which in the relief that it wet
he
afford would be very much valued by the farmers 0e ,110
country. lam not, however, now recommending tfor
measure; for I tam only going through this catalogue ea,
the purpose of showing that it is not difficult to find ID
sures of a remedial character for the agricultural inte' oby
one of which had already been selected and adopted ea
the Government. Many leading country gentleree°4
both sides of the House—men well acquainted wit
ill„wdy
provincial life and wants—have suggested that as 311:- tbe
the community at large have taken upon themselve-test
' cost of public prosecutions, they should complete 0
duty which they ought entirely to fulfil, and takelfe
themselves also the expenditure of the gaols of the u:, the
try, which are maintained for public purposes s°tteit
public advantage.—(Hear, hear.) I cannot state a' I;
moment the exact amount of the relief which snot
measure would afford to the agricultural interest-mX'as.
lost the account of it; bat it is ono moderate in itsid- be
ratter, and yet it is one that from its nature Wee' tbet
extremely appreciated by the farmers. There are ebi
measures which the Government might have hre;sll
forward of a much more important character, but woo
might have been adopted and would have afforded gtoe
relief to the occupiers of the soil, while their adells of
would not have interfered with any of the principlerio,
our present commercial system, or any of the Let
cipli s of our local administration; and -1- to
now before me one of those measures. I wishr
call the attention of the House for a moment to teei r
penditure in this country on the poor. The tantit:et
pencliture on the poor in England and Wales, oluwiet
the county rate, amounts, eccording to the last CO 011,
return, to about 6,200,0001. a year. Less than 5,00% tee
of that sum ie expended on the in-maintenance ae-01l
out-door relief of the pauper population of the coup, do
while on other charges connected with the relief egl or
poor no less a cum than 1,300,0001. is upended ine-eich
land and Wales. Now observe that the items,"l; iito
form chat very considerable amount are items whit" el'
little, if at all, affected by the agency of your 10°40'
ministration. They consist mainly of your estaa'sletl
ment charges—of the fixed salaries of the 13,000 ole;,/
come cted with the administration of the poor-la tei
(Hear, hear)—all of whose offices have been inrepusil
and devised in consequence of your recent chs°,,g;ool
the poor-law system.—(Hear.) Then, again, in 'll-,OIP
we find a similar expense of shout 370,000/. per ell3;08
You have therefore altogether in the United ICing,,%°ol;
sum of 1,700,000/, which is fastened on real prof sad
which presses grievously on the land, which in -"rt'bisp
presses entirely and especially on the land, and °desk
is scarcely affected in any degree by that local a oil
nistration and that local government with whieebi'si'
all agree that it would be most impolitic anti Sad
pedient to interfere. Now, the surplus of thle, inly
amounting to 2,000,0001., would have permitted tueedil
vermeent to have dealt with this great sun:oil-Or
is my belief, that if her Majesty's; Ministers hal:,t` ,i
pounded a well-devised measure for that ohie'nidil,
after that important recognition from the Throne 're
continued distress and difficulties of a most iraPe°'-eell
class of her Majesty's subjects, they had introduce" art'
a measure they would have done more than morellos,
lieve a suffering interest from a great incunlhilte/,1
They would have laid the foundation of that wise' o 3
temperate, and that remedial legislation which "eel
have adapted the cultivators of the soil in the
Kingdom to the novel circumstances and the nevi( 01
dition in which your unexpected, and, perhaPs' '`totii
say, your hasty legislation has placed them. Yee Rote t):1#
have commeeced a course of legislation the telld"ii-d P
which would have been to put an end to that vvf;esel
classes, end that fatal controversy that is raging bet paid
the rival industries of this country.—(Hear.) yoll';;a15,
have laid the foundation of a great system of rein
legislation, which would have done much to bring t'%st6
good feeling to the community; and you would ee'
found all men of moderate minds and temperate d',s,orseli
lions rallying round you in such an effort. And sit"; 0°
they could not have acknowledged that this yob
first step was equal to the occasion, they woultic,lol
re cognised in it an earnest endeavour on the part- io:
Government of this country to do justice to a rae;retir
portant interest, which all men now, although P`," ple,,
not openly, acknowledge has been dealt with With, -It''
capitation which is to be regretted.—(Hear, beatnik° 1116
not my intention now to make such a proposal yretto'
House, or even to convey to the House that by thedesitli
lution which I bring forward I have any covert beo,,
of recommending it. I do nothing of the kind. I s,et l'
have bean happy to have supported the Goverlaff; or
they had brought forward such a proposal. Under tea
dinary circumstances, after the announcement 0.,`, ill
subject of agricultural distress in the Speech free7olll°,
Throne at the commencement of the session, 1 id o°'
not, with such a surplus in the Treasury—l welieboleil
have shrunk myself, if the Government had not ".00P:
to undertake the task, from offering to the House -,413 :
portunity of accepting the commencement Of 6-130'
happy system of legislation. But circumstanee4;ø:
since occurred which, in my opinion, render it re'olle"
expedient far me to propose to you to support eclair)/
measure. More than two months have now elapse pet e,
the meeting of Parliament. The financial statere„-soP
the Chancellor of the Exchequer was made eight -colll:
ago. It held out to an important class in tbee from
munity the expectation of considerable relief „pee'
a tax of a very unpopular character. Circurnete".
helm permitted the intentions of the Ministry to r- Pi;
for a considerable time before the communitPterlL
Ministry themselves having again been reinsta'issir.
power, have come forward and again proposed a sibec
scheme with regard to that important class, or I.3fs'you'i
scheme still more calculated to attract popularjee eCe
The expectations of the community, therefore w'n'oe
only dwelt upon that plan, but tie, y have dwelt
of
t'
as a probable event, and have been accustomed 0' tore;
consider it as a gain entirely realized. I thillke,b Olt
fore, it would be most inexpedient to interfere wh"oferi
arrangement which Ministers have proposed Wit', 0 11C,
ence to the repeal of the window-tax. But that oil '
the main reason that prevents me from offering f,
proposal as that to which I have referred as an e.',:isooll,t:
tive for a repeal of the window-tax. I should flu'; Or(
sistently with all that I have said in this 11°°tt'elit's
what is much more important, 'should act inconsn#l6
with my profound and sincere convictions, if I tooecor
which would do exactly that which I a always stt'elft
ing to avoid and always attempting to deprecate—hamd l/'
place a question betoro the House hich woo sea
essentially and entirely a question betveen tol°4ole,
country.—(Hear, hear.) The object of those 13:, 10.;
efforts which I make with respect-to our taxati°;eitr
been, if possible, to terminate that controversy, tea-st re'
those feelings, to put an end to that strife apd rival I,
tween the great interests of the eountry; because ;vitil;',
lieve that it has already been productive of great ' 0 ',.
to the community, and because I sincerely believe., oa'
rife with very perilous consequences,
national institutions.—(Hear, hear.) Totally Wide eoVe
tive, therefore, of any considerations, I never ev°,e'ee to°.
sent to bring forward a proposition which would -etlr's.
the relief of any one class and the injury of age; 111"4
if continued %pee'
I would never attempt to obtain that justice ,:,°;0 li'
landed interest, which I am most anxious- to twit'-osste's
such means and in such a method. But it may - litr9
awtire that it is often said, that there ittiieg
,e°
a n d
I advantageam comparatively to the land in atteolP',ooo,;l
deal with. the amount raised for the poor-rates,Le9 et
a considerable portion of it is borne by other hnt; OIL
real property than the land. Now let us estu°3t,"oool.o
statement which is so current on the benches °Ktega: fa
Now, in the first place, the adoption of such a reei 00'1
as that to which I have referred would gill esters
to the amount of nearly 400,000/. to the landed . rich d;
of Ireland—('fear, hear)—that portion of the g.-tierie:s
tural community which is probably the most etiood )
for if in England we have distress; if in See.(elee„-;$
have dismay; in Ireland we have desolation•-", belSeyas
As regards Ireland, therefore, the benefit would el, Pio
considerable, and would be greatly appreciate atloa„,
let us view the incidence of this remission of to; teoll;d
England, and we shall find, I believe, that ill thit, A,, g
try the benefit would scarcely be less imports°.•oo',f3o.o
here I must observe that I am rather amused aloisel hf
that in the case of any suggestion I make for a reusetihe
of taxation to the landed interest, I am alvitaLsidee ‘,70,
the retort that I shall assist other interests L"- the "be
owners and occupiers of land. It is certainly risseieg toe
rious that we, who are always twitted with ,Au teat in
onampions of a particular class, should be 49,iuteeell° es
are perpetually fighting the battles of other l° of Ohot
every ata mpt that we make for the remissiOn toe tr io
tion.—(Hear, hear.) But let me show the I.3eoleee be
the remission of taxation which would be iirl,,,, old dr
taking off these 1,700,0004 from the 150" ;bat
001 d
very considerable; and that the statement 'Ol sv Is
a change in the system of raising this all3°o i9m.
afford no relief to the agricultural interest 00",),
suffering beP fallacy which the farmer who is
e tare 65'1
the burden of the poor-rate never can -,e, ea, no
Observe his position. Here is a farmer psY'Prefid3 ii"to
or 7s. in the pound for poor-rates. But be:o
.I;:lc,,"se
nee speeers. it. d fieds t.L. ,t the Chancellor of tit` beetwid,
quer tells him that that is no burden on hint is. %II
the averege of the poor-rate in England is leaf vios
in the pound.—(Hear, hear.) Averages are s elle 11:/'
to guide us is our researches, but they are 00