The Sun.
London, England, 1851-06-03 00:00:00

165 i,

Sir E N. BUX I'ON pre., nted several petitions against
the Eccit siastica,t Titles and the Religious Houses Bill.
Mr. SPOONER presented a petition from Mr. Ed-
syho was recently committed to Newgate in con-
sequence of his conduct before the St. Albans' Election
Committee, stating that his affairs were going to ruin,
arid expressing the deepest sorrow and contrition at
the offence ho had committed. The petitioner threw
himself on the mercy of the HousP, and prayed to be
discharged. The lion. Member gave notice that to-
morrow he would move that the petition be printed with
the votes, with the view of submitting a motion to the
House that Edwards be discharged on Friday next.
Viscount NEWPORT presented a petition from cer-
tain Peers for an alteration in the oath of supremacy.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from a place in Scot-
land against the Scottish Sewerage Bill.
Mr. SCULLY presented a petition from a place in
Ireland against the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill.
Viscount CAS FLERZAGIi presented a similar peti-
tion from the Town Commissioners of Newry.
Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Manchester
against the Negium Donum.

ME IitOPOLI VAN POOR'S RATE.
Mr. SCHOLSFIELD moved fir a return of the rate
i❑ the pound !vied for the relief of the poor in each year
from 1831 to 1850 inclusive, on the annual value of pro-
perty rated for the metropolitan parishes of St. Luke's,
Middlesex, Shoreduch, Clerkenwell, St. Marylebone,
Hackney Union, St. Pancras with Hampstead, St.
Martin-in-the-Fields, Islin K-nsington, St. George
Hanover-square, and Bermondsey.—'Agreed to.
LOSS OF THE ORION.
Mr. HUME moved that there be laid before this
Howe, by the Commissioners of Northern Lighthouses
(as supplement of the return No. 288, ordered to be
printed 14th May, 1851), a return of copies of all cor-
reapondenc, between the Commissioners a,,d the Trea-
sury, or the Admiralty, and of the documents therein
referred to. in regard to Portpatrick Harbour Light, or
in regard to the loss of the " Orion" steamer.
Agreed to.

DINGLE UNION.
Mr. REYNOLDS rose to ask the Chief Secretary
for Ireland, if the It-vpr,nd Mr. 14,-wis and the R-verend
Mr. Goodma❑, the Protestant ehsplaius of the Dingle
Union Workliou,e, have been dismissed by the board of
guardians, and if sn, whether th it removal has been
netioned by the Poor-law Commissioners.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said he had no reason to be-
lieve that the board of guardians had removtid either of
the gentlemen.

of May the motion for a Committee had been put
carried. For the House, therefore, to rescind d oiet re.re
in an indirect torn was a dangerous operation.
so, he (Jr.' Aglionby) gave eetete that in case the it
res "
lotion to reseitid the vote of inquiry into the income-t!!
was carried, he should move the extension of the t w
three years.
• Mr. lIUME explained the course he bad taken iti theee,
construction of the Cernmittee. On the House decirrlbl
that th.re should be a Committee he bed put down on '
list only tour names on his own side; and these were l
o,
names of Hon. Gentlemen who had brought forward 90.
stautive motions on the subject of the income• tax in 134' i
He had then crossed over to the Hon. Member r„
Buckinghamshire, and showing him his list, asked bits.;
recommend four of his friends, which was tione--.Tiht,
Hon. Member being himself the fourth, only at his (.'e,
Hume'.) express solicitation. He (Nlr. Hume) lu,v,
went to the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for &Poi
and asked bun to serve on the Cemmittee with tbre:Ll
his political friends of the Peel Administration, but tool
Right Hon. Baronet declined to du so. He (Nlr. On,
after this went to the Chancellor of the Exchequer: end
pressing a wish to have Mr. Goulburn, Mr. Cardweile.se
Mr. F. Peel. These formed eleven Members if
chose to serve. The members recommended
by the
Chancellor or the Exchequer were put on, with the
ception of Colonel Rawdon, Tne Hon. Member
eluded by stating that he would cast the onus of the v°it•
ter on the Government, by pressing his motion.
_met
Mr. DEEDEi had supported the motion on a Pdis.
occasion to limit he income-tax to one 3 ear, on the l
tinct understanding that a Committee shard be Dge
pointed to inquire into the operation of that 191;
could not, therefore, vote for the amendment. 11,,
rot
jetted, however, to tho way in which the landed iht
was represented ou the Committee, though be admittede
the composition of that body was better then last 7, the
He (Mr. Dee des) objected altogether, however, to
two Members for the West Riding being on the _ 'l/0,
reittee, and he could not, moreover, see why thee
Member for the Qu. en's County was placed upon 14 er
cep, with the ulterior object of extending the, jecodo.
ed
tax to Irelaed.—(Cheers). Be, therefore, recoannec
the Hon Member for Montrose to suspend for the Pre'
sent the further nomination of the Committee, Wit", .
view to meet the objecuous that existed against its cco
positien.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said that the Hon. ''w
for Montrose forgot one step, lie gave notice °f hie
motion on one night, and on the next he carried s
turn which had its its terms been changed. The 11: co oe
teerefore, had no opportunity of coming to a duels°
the question.
weak!
Lord J. RUSSELL said the Hon. Gentleman e Des
have prevented some difficulty had he is the first ilest
aclepted the suggestion of the Hon. Member for the be
ting by moving fer a me chficatiou of the to, Ithea
wished to have a modification. The House woundo'
have known what they were about, and the Hoe. ,iesi
bers could then have voted for the proposition or °e°-i bt
it. The vote for a Committee of Inquiry the other rig
read been aupperted ;he 230 Members who Vie,rbers
favour on different grounds. No wonder, then, she
should be a misunderseseaing on the matter. Altertbet
vote had been come to the other evening, he stated
bi
Government were willing. to consent to an inquiryleere
Committee into the tax, and that if a Committee
appointed it should be as far as possible constitutedo
p rains taken from both sides of the House tossers
by
with subjects r f finance, and who would be seeeile‘t
the Committee as authorities on that subject. be ,
was one way in which he wished the Committee toot
appointed. But the Honourable Gentleman bad
oe
succeeded in his object. In the first place,ding
certain gentlemen belonging to the Cabinet and bold
office under the late Sir Robert Peel had not cone's be
to act on the Committee. The Committee would O
such a Committee as he could approve of. Then thee,
was one name on the Committee to which he should
cidedly object--it was the name of the Chancellor ef the
Exchequer. He did not thiuk the Chancellor eh,ribe
Exch• quer ought to go into a Committee of that kiss
with two or three gentlemen who might be of his
eiP/3i
to
to contest such points with the other Members, srne.
whetorer thereerw h ehould be a modification of the iDeC-acje tax, othise. Such propositions ought to be o'6.
by the Chancellor of the Exchequer hinsself in Cc-al
mittee. There was only one thing which remained, 6-61
that was—if the Hon. Member for Montrose did prece-e
to propose such a Committee, he should tune to °la
agreement previously with other Hon. Members, fir
might be able to meet the arguments relative to the lb,
herent detects of the. tax being, as he bad been told be
had once stated, unequal, vexatious, and fraudulent.
could not vote for the amendment.
Mr. HENLEY said it was hard for the Hon. Member
for Cock' rmeuth to take the course he had taken. j'd
House was placed in this position—the Noble Lord 56,i,1
the Committee could not be constituted in the
way
could have desired; therefore, let the Hon. Member
wicl,l4
Montrose have his Committee to work its own
will. He had no doubt of the ability of the Hon. n.le•"„'
ber, and the strong case the Committee would preseej
but he considered such a Committee would not commas
the confidence of the country, and therefore he WC',t
vote for the amendment.
Mr. HORS MAN said many similar motions had bee:
made with various fortune. But ho far from the pretelt
embarrassment having arisen from the views of extrefee
parties in that House, the truth was, that the anbartas;
went had been caused by Government relying with too
touch confidence on the votes of their usual supporter"
He considered the Hen. Member for Montrose bad taker
the only course that was suited to the nature of the o°'
casion. The Hon. Member's object was not to make
the tax perpetual, but to make it more equal. Thor°
were various epitrions as to the tax—his was, that the
'ax, as an experiment, had been attended with great au'
ventage.
sir. T. BARING said the country would never permit
the tax to be continued without a Committee of Inquiry' He could nor vote ;or the amendment. He could rot consent to shelve the inquiry unless some security were
given that the tax would not be made a permanent tea'
Mr. BOOKER said no one on his side of the "louse
would desire to give a shock to public credit by with
drawing the tax at a time when the financial position Of
the country might re quire it; but he certainly did tOt
approve of the proposal for making it permanent. 01
approved of it in the original sense, and for the origins,
purpose for which it was proposed.
Mr. COBDEN had voted against the motion of the
Hon. Member fUr Montrose rho other night. because
the motion was calculated, in the form in which it veal
made, to obtain votes from Hon. Gentlemen opposite Whf
did riot entertain the same vices on the question .which
he did. He. hail made appeals, private and public, t°
the Honourable, Member against bringing forward hie
mourn in its oliginal form. He assumed that a Corn'
mittee would be granted, but he never expected
any good from the Committee as far as the 0138
year was concerned, because be was satisfied a majority
would be decidedly opposed to such a modification. Be
wished to vote on the subject of modification. The,
Hon. Member for Coekermouth said if so, that weak'
oe assenting to the principle; now he wanted to let the
country see what the House said and what the House
did on this question. He was of opinion the House
and the country were labouriug under tt delusion on the
subject. The press had led the country to believe that
the House debited credit fur the honesty and bona fidg
character of the decision which had been arrived at.
He had voted against the Hon. Member when the pro-
posal was to limit the tax for one year; but be could
not vote against the proposition for a Committee. 11°
confessed he would prefer to have the tax, bad as it We°.
for three years rather that, one year, because be did not
look at the question per se: ho looked at it with
reference to the whole of the taxation and the necessities
of the revenue. If the income-tax was bad, other
taxes were worse, and pressed more injuriously on the
people. He should vote in good faith for the motion,
although some Hon. Member said it was impossible to
turn round, and, in the face of the country, vote in the
teeth of the former vote.
Mr. HERMES was understood to say he would vote
for the amendment.
The House then divided—
Fur the amendment 94
Fcr the motion
Majority against the amendment... 193
-- 99
On our re-admission to the gallery we found
Mr. HORSeIAN inquiring when the nomination of
the Committee would take place ?
Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to name Friday.
Mr. MONSELL wished to know whether the Ecclesi-
astical Titles Bill would be proceeded with on Friday If so, it would prevent many Hon. Members from leo-
mg townj
.oHn RUSSELL
uo dn
ott must f douaoieyols,d.L)s
withea
reason conseuc
alleged byHon. M. mbar.daythoen
SIASTIC teL TITLES ASSUMPIONBaBcieIIIIuII
the
Eof
ctehr.,'Friday.erdu
The House then went into Committee on this Bill.
Mr. WALPOLE rose, and said he
day to state the course
he intended to pursue with re-
spect to certain ilmflidments he had to propose. lie
N
wished to support the promised on Fri'
oble Lord as far as he could it!
his Bill, and at the same time he wished to make the Bill
as compl to as he could, and as effectual for its purpose,
before it passed through
to en Committee. He had iu copse. quce given notice of amendme nte, which he considered
be all right in themselves, anti some absolutely essene
tial for the success of the Bill. Feeling this he said that
he could not consent to give way as to any
amendments
on which he laslieved depended the success of the mea.
sure; nor could he give way in any amendment, utiless
slime strong countervailing reason was shown to induce
him to do it. Two reasons had been assigned why he
ought not to press his amendments. One was, that the
declaratory clause, or, as the Hon. Member for Dublin
said, the Walpole clause, had given almost all he asked
for, in effec —and, therefore, it was unnecessary to press
it. The other reason had been intimated by the Noble
Lord opposite, that Members friendly to the passing of
the Bill, when they saw the various delays and impedi-
ments to the progress of the Bill that had taken place,
would be of opwion that the friends of the Bill ought not
to add to the delay or increase these impediments. He
was strongly of opinion that these reasons ought to
have great weierec with him—so much so, that be
theught it right, having a little leisure to spare from
business in which he was otherwise occupied,
to reconsider the whole subject, and, having done
so, to state to the Committee what amendments he
would press and what amendments he would waive.
Having obtained the declaratory clause, which, to his
mind, was of more imp, rtance than anything else in the
I e should propose nothing but
Bill, and fearing to impede the progress of the fill
twhnraotugah'as Creoamllrayiettsesee'utial to the proper working of the
Bill. He thought three things were essential. In the
first place, he considered it was absolutely essential to
the proper working of the Bill that it should clearly lay
down, define, and point out the constitutional principles
on which the ll.,use proceeded. Since the de bate an
friday last he was more convinced than ever that the
supposed ambiguity existed Inure in the minds of it/
opponents than in the clause itself. He was sure no
ambiguity would be found is the clause if it were re•