The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-24 00:00:00

into the whole ques':on. (Hear.) The Government 'slid
not intend to take any steps for the entire abolition of the
system of purchase in the army. It could not be so dealt
with as some proposed, without the expenditure of large
sums by way of compensation. (Hear.) Therefore the
Government entertained no such intention as the noble lord
appeared to suppose. The question was whether it was not
necessary to provide some remedy for admitted evils of the
system. (Hear.) One of these evils was the practice of
receiving and paying large sums for commissions above the
regulation prices. This practice was general if not uni-
versal ; but it was in direct contravention of the law. An
Act of Parliament existed denouncing penalties against it,
the offender being liable to be cashiered. That act was
called to the attention of officers by the army regulations,
and had very lately been acted upon by an indictment in
the Queen's Bench, on which the parties had been convicted
and imprisoned. Therefore the officers who followed this
practice well knew it was illegal and illegitimate. Now that
was not a system which could be considered satisfactory.
And though successive Commanders-in-Chief knew of the
practice they had only seemed to acquiesce in it, not because
approving of it, but because unable to discover the
parties really implicated in any particular transactions.
The evil existed, however, and ought to be eradicated. It
had been stigmatised as " ruinous" and " mischievous" by
the highest military authorities. An order had lately been
issued from the Horse Guards reducing the ps:c 3 of cavelry
commissions, and this had some effect. The question was
one of very great importance. There had taken place lately,
in the system of promotion in the army, certain changes, the
effect of which was that, whereas before the warrant of
1854, there existed a system of promotion by brevet, under
which an officer slowly, but surely, went on step by step.
That was altered, and there were, now no means of getting
the higher ranks except by serving in certain ranks, regi-
mental or staff. The question to be considered wrc wnether
the plan proposed by the commission was deserving of ap-
proval. The person whose duty it was to appoint a com-
manding officer should have the largest field for selection ;
and it was of the greatest importance that if an officer was
unfit to be promoted the Commander-in-Chief should have
the power of passing over him and appointing a more fit
officer. The Government was fully convinces of the ne-
cessity of proceeding with the utmost caution and delibera-
tion in makibg the proposed change. He believed, how-
ever, that by this step, instead of dimirishipg, they could
add to the efficiency of the army, and remove what ap-
peared to him to be at present a great blot and scandal upon
the army. (Hear.)
The Earl of LUCAN hopsi that the Government would
consider well before they adopted a step which he believed
ould be fatal to the British army. He frankly admitted
that the present system of purchase, where a large sum in
excess of the regulation price was paid, we sin itself an M it ;
but he 'behoved that that evil might be very much dimi-
nished without altogether ab dishing the system. Sehing
aside the money which was paid in excess, no object:on
could fairly be made to the system, for the purchase money
might be regarded in the light of guarantee, since the officer
„tin retiring got back the money, end it we ; for the Com-
mander-in-Chief to appoint, hie successor. He believed
that the system of purchase had woeked admirably, and
that none other ha i worked so well. Thera were no regi-
ments in the world superior to the English ; and, although
in foreign regiments the officers might be more scientific,
L yet for fidelity and brave's, no officers could excel
t or equal those of the British army. Marshal
. Canrobert, on his return room the Crimea, where he had
, ample opportunities of judging, said that there was no
' soldier in Europe braver than the English soldier, except the
' English officer. It was intended, nevertheless, to tanner
with this system, which had answered so admirably, ana to
propose that the system of purchase should be abolished in
respect to officers of a higher grade than majors. He had
read with great attention the evidence upon wnicb, the report
" was founded, end he could not recollect a single opinion ex-
pressed by any witness of note recommending this change.
L He should like to ask the noble earl whether he or his chief
had considered the difficulties of workings:out the new sys-
. t nu, which he believed to 13 impracticable. The noble earl
then proceeded to point out the unfair advantages which the
Artillery and Guards would enjoy over the cavalry and line
regiments, if the proposed change was ersTied out. If a
major was passed ovetsby the Commander-in•Chief,it would
reflect so seriously upon his character that it would be im-
possible for him to continue in the army. Upon what prin-
ciple was the Commander-in-Chief to make his selection,
and how was he to ascertain the qualities of the officer to be
appointed ? The noble duke the Commander-in-Chief had
told the commission that the plan was impracticable, and
the.result would bo thathe would be obliged to revert to that
objectionable system of appointment by seniority. It was
the object of the commission to show that improper officers
had been appointed to the command of regiments, and he
was certainly srlarised to find how few instances had been
established. The commission appeared in their reeommen •
dations to have borrowed from the French army, but with
only an imperfect knowledge of what the system was. The
chef-de-bataillon had opportunities of displaying his capa-
bilities as a commander, and it was easy for the Commanaer-
in-Chief to form an estimate of his capacity for the command
of a regiment ; but the case was different with a major in
the English army, who had no opportunities of showing his
capabilities to command a regiment. Upon the general ques-
tion of purchase in the army, it was notorious that the evil
of slow promotion was so great in the artillery that the offi •
cers had actually proposed the introduction of the system of
purchase into that branch of the service. He trust..d that
the Goveeament would well consider before they adopted
the proposals of the commission, and abolished the system
of purchase.
The Duke of SOMERSET asked why the noble lord
(Lord Panmure) had appointed the commission, if he was
confident in his own mind that the system of purchase was
good, and that it would be most ruinous to destroy it ? The
noble lord, as the representative of the Government, ought
not to have appointed the commission, and whyin the world
did ho do so ? (Hear, and laughter.) His object must have
been to shelve the question. He (the Duke of Somerset)
was prepared to support the decision at which the commis-
sion had arrived. (Hear.) The commander of a regiment
had a most important trust to discharge. The issue of a battle
might depend upon him. The mortality in the Crimea lead
been found to depend very much upon the efficiency et the
commanders of the respective regiments, and it was most ab-
surd to appoint an officer merely because he was possessed of
sufficient money to purchase the command. The Com-
mander-in-Chief had ample means of knowing the acquire-
ments of every officer, and who was the one best suited to be
appointed. Surely there was no difficulty in passing over
' an officer, as the answer to any objection would be easy,
that, without disparagement to the claims of the officer who
was passed over, the claims of another seemed to be prefer-
able. The question, in feet, resolved itself into this—
whether the interests of the public or those of the officers
were to be consulted. He rlowed there were difficulties in
carrying out the system ; ho was not prepared to suggest a
remedy in every case, but he was quite convinced that the
wider the field of selection the better it would be for the
army and the country. By kaeping up the system of pur
chase to a certain point, the great desideratum of having
young officers in the lower ranks would be obtained, wh"e
the principle of selection would keep the higher grades of
the army in an efficient condition. There were no armies in
the world in which the higher ranks of the army were filled
up by purchase. He would not go into the general subject,
but would content himse'f with saying that although there
might be difficulties in carrying out the proposed system,
yet he was satisfied that it would be such an improve-
ment upon the present system, that the difficulties of the
change should be well considered, with a view to their
removal and the introduction of a better system into the
army.
Earl GREY agreed with the noble duke that the task of
selecting commanding officers was a most important one,
and that they ought not to be appointed merely because
they possessed a certain amount of money. But he was
quite convinced that the practical working of the proposed
system would be this, that, except in very rr-e cases, the
appointments would be by seniority. This wee the opinion
expressed by the illustrious Commander-in-Chief—(hear,
hear)—and he cud not believe it would be found that a
superior class of officers would be appointed. On the con-
trary, he believed that the present system gave to the Com-
mander in-Chief the opportunity of passing over inefficient
officers, by recommending such as were unfit for promotion
to sell out. (Hear, hear.) He knew that this plan had
been a lopted, and he believe 1 that it was still the practice
of his Royal Highness the present Commander-in-Chief.
The political advantages of the present system appeared to
be enormous. It placed men of position and standing, who
in later life were to occupy important offices in the State,
under the salutary influence of military command. (Hear,
hear.) It had also the effect of preventing the army from
being exclusive, and this ye-Li materially destroyed the
danger which naturally attached to a large standing army.
(Hear, hear.)
The Duke of CAMBRIDGE said that, in the position
which he occupied, it would be most indelicate on I's part
to enter into any arguixents, because his opinions were
well known, and had been given to the commission over
which the noble duke (Duke of Somerset) had presided. He
regretted to say that he had not changed the opinion which
he then entertained ; and he would merely add that what-
ever might he decided upon, he could assure the noble duke
and the house and the country, that as far as he was able
he would make it his earnest and anxious endeavour—diffi-
cult, and perhaps to a certain extent almost impossible—to
carry out the system asth a view to the best interests of the
r opy and the advantage of the country.
is
nyesVir
ne
nnuftneptrut
entertained
iclnhAeadlstetDhwlr).
opinionG E believed that t ) abolish the
would
db e m
thatostinjthueriopuns.n.
principle
ohfaelf 01,
selec-
tion was preferable, but having read the evidence of his
RoyalaoHmpipAgiheNtriisysunalinttedtr
etdh noble earl, his former opinions had
himbe e n
withm ad made
deliberately
ahtienlsy by
issuing
beLenorc
complained of the attack which EP l
the noble duke, who had charged
question.the commission for the pur-
itsheonly answer t that
pose of shelving the
feelings with which a gentleman should repudiateat
charge was this, that he repudiated t attack witha chargeall the
upon his personal honour He was not satisfied that the pre-
sent system mas all. that could be desired, and be was desi-
rous to see if sonic charge for the better could not be
intro-
duced. He confessed that he
as not satisfied with the ro-
stilt of the delibera,:ons of the commission.
The Duke of SOMERSET said lie did not intend to s a
anything which could affect the personal character of they
noble earl.
The bill was then read a second time.
Their lordships adjourned at a gum :es to nine o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
:he SPEAKER took th© chair at four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following* ;;;;;e:;.la third time and passed
and hayfield Railway ; London and North Western
Railway and Saint Helens Canal and Railway Companies ;
And. atwestry and Newtown Railway (Branch Railway,
&c.)

'he Wigan Water Bill was considered and ordered for
-d reading.

ROY AL COMMISSION.
- The USHER OF THE BLACK ROD summoned the house
to the bar of the House of Lords, to hear the Royal as•vnt
given,by commission to several bills, for which see Lords'
report. The Speaker, accompmied by some members, then
proceeded to the House of Lqrds.
• CHURCH RATES.
A considerable portion of the evening was occupied in
hearing petitions for and against the abolition of church-
rates. - • •

. .
• .LEAVE OF: ABSENCE..: • .
On the motion of Mr. RICARDO, leave of absence was
:.given to Mr. Alderman Copeland, on 'the- ground of domes •
tic affliction. •

NORWIH ELETION.
Mr.. T. DUN COMBE C
moved.thaCt Mr. Speaker do issue
his warrant 'to the Clerk of, the Crown• to make out a new
mrit far the electing of two citizens to serve-in this presefit
Parliament for the city of Norwich, in the room of. Henry
tVilliaui William . Schneider, Esq., and tho Right ilonouridtle
Coutts Koppel, commonly called Viscount
BLLrYt whose elections have been determined to be void.

He remarked that there were no less than nine vacancies
in Parliament at present, and complained that by the
rules of the house he was not able to move
for this wilt on a previous occasion, 'because he
could not bring it forward before half-past four o'clock.
A constitutional principle was involved in the question,
for it was most important that the representation in Parlia-
ment should be compete. (Hem)
Mr. GRIFFITH opnosed t'ie motion in consequence
of the corruption twat had been proved against
the eon stituency of Norwi Ct. He denied in tote
what might be called the jargon a Parliament,
as to the corrupting influence exercised by candidates, and
considered that the corruption originated with the feelings
and sentiments of constituencies taemselves. He believed
that a majority would V 043 with him if they were actually
sincere in the sentiments they expressed in favour of purity
of election. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT said that he had presented a petition from
the corporation of the city of Norwich, numerously signed,
stating that extensive bribery had been committed in the
city of Norwich, and praying for a commission to inquire
into the subject. It was a fact that when an election peti-
tion was decided, no person appeared to have anY interest
in the question of the commission of bribery, and no inquiry
was made into the matter. With respect to the pe Alen
of the Corporation of Norwich, it was presented too late
according to the rules of the house, to be entertened. There
had been more cor. aption at Norwichthan in Gloucesterand
Wakefield together, and, therefore, it was to be regretted
that an inquiry couldnot be procec Jed with. The petitioners
stated that nay hal done all in their power to prevent
the screening of the great electoral iniquity that had taken
place in the city of Norwich. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK said it would serve Norwich i'ght if
no writ for that city were issued for ten years. (Hear, hear,
and laughter.) He believed the bribery complained of did
not take place without the sanction of the authorities of
Norwich, and ho believed that those who accepted bribes at
the last general election would do the same again when they
had the opportunity. He called on the house to pass such a
vote on the present occasion as *would mark their sense of
the corruption that pervaded certain constituencies of the
country. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BOUVERIE explained that the petitions against
the late members had reference to the corruption practised
at the last general election, and not at the last election of
these members. Bribery had been proved in the case of
the Clare election, and he did not see that there were any
grounds for not adopting the course pursued in regard to
!sluing a writ for that place, so far as related to the city of
Norwich.
After a few words from Mr. COLLINS,
Sir G. GREY said he did not rest the question of issu-
ing this writ on the ground that another writ under similar
circumstances had been ordered, but he contended
that on general grounds they could refuse this writ. As
the hon. member for Birmingham has stated the petition
fnom the Corporation of Norwich was presented too late to
be acted on by the house. The election committee in this
re/3ov.* did not atutc any circumstances to justify the
appointment of a select committee to inquire into the alleged
corruption at Norwich, and it was to be regretted that the
inquiry could not be instituted.
After'some observations from Captain Jeitvis and Mr.
VANSITTAILT
The SPEAKER said that the motion for the writ in the
case of Mr. Schneider. had been formally put by him and
agreed to ; and the question before the house related to the
writ with reference to the voidance of Lord Bury's election.
This statement created considerable astonishment, hon.
members not being aware of the position in which the ques •
tion then stood, as some irregularity prevailed when the
Speaker put the motion.
After some further discussion, the motion for a new writ
for the election of a burgess. in the room of Lord But y, was
put and carried without a division.
PATENTS.

Captain JERVIS moved an addreess for all sums paid for
patents annually, ..;:om the Ist day of January, 1855 to the
Ist day of January, 1860, and of the manner in which the
same have Leen disposed of during that pertod.—Ordered.
CHINA AND JAPAN. •

Sir DE LACY EVANS moved an address fora return
showing the salaies or allowances of the plenipotentiaries,
secretaries, and interpreters, or other officers of the missions
to China and Japan, of the Earl of Elgin, the Hon. Mr.
Bruce, and Mr. Alcock.—Ordered.
SAVOY AND NICE.

Mr. KINGLAKE asked the Semetary of State for Fo-
reign Affairs whether there would be any objection to lay
upon the table of the hou e the following papers relating to
the proposed annexation to France of Savoy and Nice, viz. :
—M. Thouvenel's lr at despatch on that subject, the answer
of her Majesty's Government thereto, and the note recently
addressed to her Majesty's Government by the Government
of Switzerland ; and also (if they have been communicated)
the protest address:i by the Swiss Government to the Go-
vernment of France, a-id the answer of M. Thouvenel
thereto ?
Lord J. RUSSELL—I think it word be injurious to the
public service to lay these papers on the table; but I will
state on raother day when they may be prc dueed.
In reply to a number of other questions,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that he would reply to the seve-
ral questions that had been put to him, as distinctly as pos-
sible. The hon. and gallant member for Westminster had
asked a question in reference to the mission to China, and
stated that his wish was that there should only be one mis-
sion to that country, and that Mr. Bruce should be recalled
on Lord Elgin going to China. In the first place, he would
say that it was always understood that in the case of special
mission, the actual expenses should be paid in addition to
any salary that might be allowed. It was impossible, how-
ever, to form any accurate estimate of the cost of such mis-
sion until it was concluded. With. regard to the recall of
Mr. Bruce, he (Lord J. Russell) never could have gone to
Lord Elgin, and have proposed that a mark of degradation
should have been placed upon his brother at the time that
ho was asking him to go to China. (Hear, hear.)
Lord Elgin would remain there only so long as
his services would be requirei, and the regular mission
wo&d bo retained no uowil. ll° }hart had acveral interviews
with the Emperor of the French, the French MiniSter for
Foreign Aff..-s, rid Baron Gros. He informed him (Lord
J. Russell) that there was a general agreement on the sub-
ject of the irstructiors to be given; and ho hoped that be-
fore long Lord Elgin would be able to set out on his mis-
sion. Baron Gros, he believed, would depart about the
sr-ne time. (He: r, hear.) The next question referred to
Morocco, but the ga''ant officer who asked that question
might have seer, some months ago, in the Gazette, and
afterwards in the papers before the house, an-account of
the security we proposed to take against the permanent
occupation of Tangiers. We represented to the Spanish
Government that Tangiers was of great importance to the
victualling of Gibraltar. Tal-ing no part in the war, they
did not, of course, interfere with the military operations of
Spain, but we asked h the most friendly way that Spain
should agree, if Tangiers were occupied, that it should not
be permanently annexed to Spain. To that proposition
Spain agreed. The correspondence was before Pr-liament,
and he had no doubt that the Spa rish Government would
faithfully perform its promise. The Morocco Government
hid proposed, he understood, a-i indemnity to Spain, and if
that should be acc3pted, the war may be shortly concluded.
If not, it was impossible for him to say how long the occu-
pation of Tangiers, or Tetuan, or any other place, may be
continued. The next question was with regard to the
memoir e from the Swiss Government sent to this country
some months ago. The hon. member for Pontefract had
before asked him for a copy of that nzemoire, and it was
ordered that an address should be presented for it. He be-
lieved that it was now in the hands of the printer. It was
of considerable length, but he hoped that it world soon be
laid on the table of the house. The =op which accompa-
nied it was one of great detail, end it would be impossible,
without considerable expense and delay, to procure a fag
simile of it. But they were endeavouring to mol;e an out-
line of the frontiers proposed ; and if the boundary stated
on the map was that of 1814, 'he trusted that that map
would likes ise soon be placc I before the house. (Hear.)
The hon. member for Perthshire (Mr. Stirling) then asked
him if he (Lord J. Russell) would lay upon the table ex-
tracts from his privat3 correspondence. He did not mean
to lay on the table any part of his privata letters. (Hear.)
But if the hon. gentleman had looked at all the papers he
would have found the substance of all that he asked to
have. When Lord Cowley reported on the 4th of July
his conversation with Count Walewski, be said that his
Excellen6y's language *as not over satisfactory. His
Excellency stated that there was no understanding what-
ever between France and Sardinia. He did not deny that
the question had been more than once discussed, and that
the Emperor entertained the idea that if Sardinia be-
came a largo Italian kingdom it was not unreasonable
to expect that she should make territorial concessions
elsewhere. That was the language of the despatch,
and at various tines when Lord Cowley spoke
to Count.Walev.-ski, his Excellency repeated that if Sar-
dinia were to become a le:ge kingdom, which he did not

allow to be possible, sho ought to make some territor;al

concessions. Lord Cowley, in speaking of M. Thouvenel
- -

on the 27th January, said that as Count NValewsl,i had h.-
formed months ago that the idea of the annexation of
Savoy, if ever entertained, had been abandoned at the time

of the signature of the peace of Villafranea, said he could
not help asking his ExcAleney if ho had any information

on the subject ? Tb;s did not at :se as an immediate ques-
tion of diplomatic discussion; but Cot--at %Valewski always
maintained that the peace of Villafranca, and afterwards
the treaty of Zurich, obliged the Emperor to use every
means Aril t. of actual force to restore the Archdukes in

-
Tuscany and Modena. Thus ho repeated what ho had
already said in reference to an increase of territory by Sar-
dinia, and that France in that event would expect territo-
rial concessions. But this had nothing t 3 do with what
was going to he done. What at as going to be done was to
call together a Congress. Before the Congress there was
no doubt. that Count Walewski would have proposed, on
the part of France, that the Grend Lake should be restored
in Tuscany, because he told Lord Cowley that if he made a
proposition to the Congress, that would be the one he would
make. Ile did not see that the produc;ion of any private
letters of Lord Cowley would add to that infm.nation. The
state of things was this—That so long as Count Walewski
remained in °thee, the French Government would consi-
der themselves bound to restore the Grand Duke in 'rus-
eany ; cud if he: had -been restored in Tuscany, and if the
Duke of Modena had been restored in Modena, there
would have been no question whatever of the annexation I
of Savoy to Prance. The honourable gentleman expressed
his regret that he (Lord John Itussc-11) had said
tkat night that he could not produce at present the an-
swer of the Government to M. Thouveners despatch. Ile
certainly stated some nights ago that he hoped shortly to
be able to produce it, but he was now obliged by a sense of
duty to act inconsistently with font declaration. Since he
to bar Majesty's Government,
anise negotiations had intervened. Switzer.
only.reatthed the Govprument that morn.
i‘uNa.ihnaidd6eibitathidpapt
einia?ha
teli
midst ofner,otiations, and to invite the house to dictate the
ing, and TO produce that dispatch would be to do so b 1 the
answer which he should give to that dispatch before the
Government had time to consider it. It would be contrary
to precedent and to the principle of our constitution to lay
the despatch'en the table of the house. The question.was
still a matter of negotiation, and it would be requisite for
the Government to corn nunicate 'with the different Powers
of Europe on the subject of this -annexation. In the midst

of such negotiations it would be impossible for him to pro-
duce the papers. As soon as he could consistently with his
duty he would do so. He had no inclination to conceal any-
thing from the house in this matter; but when an hon.
gentleman said that the French Government did not hesi-
tate to publish despatches. he thought he must be aware
that their position was difeeent from ours. It was true that
ad, patch was pein`ed la the Monitsur, but there wen not
in France an assembly to dlscass that despatch, or news-
papers which commented freely on iia contents. There it
certainly remains for the con siderat _on of the French people,
but it is free Nen all hostile celtieism. (Hear, hear.) In
this country the case was wholly different, and he was glad
that it was so, but still it rendered it prudent that the Eng-
lish Government should display some reserve.
Mr. DISRAELI said he was sure that the plea urged by
the noble lord for not laying the despatch in reference to
the annexation of-Savoy on the table, on the ground that
it would be inconsistent with his public duty to do so then,
because negotiations were about to take place with respect
to them with foreign Powers, weed have its due weight
with the house, and he would not then further allude to
the subject. But the noble lord had that evening, when
speaking on the subject, referred to the negotiations which
had taken place between this Government and the French
Government between July end December last. The noble
lord had not abided by the statement which he had made
originally on the subject, but had adopted the opinions of
the First Minister, who said that they could take no step
in the matter, as they were expecting a Congress to meet to
take the whole matter into consideration. But the House of
Commons lam well enough that a Congress was not a de
liberative assembly, and that all matters to be submitted to
it were to be previously considered and settled by the
Powers to be represented at that Congress. He therefore
could not accept the explanation given upon this subject
by the noble lord the Foreign Minister, or by the First
Minister himself. Then the noble lord objects to extracts
from his private letters being laid before the house on this
question. They did not ask for extracts from the noble
lord's private letters, but what the house did expect was,
that such extracts should be made f-oin his letters and the
ambassador's letters as should place in the Foreign Office
a complete diplomatic record of all the transactions con-
nected with this question of the annexation of Savoy. (Hear.)
The noble lord seemed to think it was wrong to make ex-
tracts from private letters ; but what was the case with re •
spect to Naples ? Why, there an extract was made from a
letter which was a menace to the King of Naples. More on
that another time, and he only rose to protest against the
statement that because a Congress was expected we ought
not to be in a position to meet the intentions of France in
reference to the annexation of Savoy.
Lord PALMERSTON said the right hon. gentleman
had stated that everybody knew that a Congress was not a
deliberative assembly, and that it met simply to record
decisions e'ready taken. With all submission to the right
hon.. gentleman, he begged leave to say that. the ;elections
which he ascribes to a Congress were precisely those which
it was .not assembled to per:orm. A Congress was espe-
cially called together to deliberate. It was for this purpose
that ell, the representatives of the different Powers meet—
to discusseconsider, and determine—sitting round setable--
platters which by correspondence world never be brought
to a,satisfaetory. conclusion. Indeed, the. very invitation
sent to the Powers to meet in Congress implied delibera-
tion. The right hon. gentleman said that it was the duty
of the Government to have settled this question of Savoy
beforehand with France, in order that, having settled it,
the Congress might ratify the arrangement come to between
them. - Our object in the Congress must have been to have
enlisted 'on our -side the influence rind opinions of other
Powers represented in that Congress. It was obvious that
it was more likely that the Goverment of France would
be induced to give way on a point on which we might differ
in this manner, rather than to expect that by England and
France discussing the matter together it would be settled
as we could wish. It was quite plain, therefore, that the
best method of inducing a foreign Power to yield its
opinions was to wait till four or five Powers could meet
together, when it would be much more likely that a foreign
Power would yield in deference to the wishes of a Congress
than to give way to a single Power which desired a change.
The right hon. gentleman was misleading the house, both
as to the nature of the Congress and as to the policy pur-
sued by the Government. As to private letters, the hon.
gentleman seemed to think they ought to be converted into
public despatches.
Mr. DISRAELI—No, no.
Lord PALMERSTON—I say yes. The right hon. gen-
tleman says that every private letter that contains anything
en public matters— .
Mr. DISRAELI—No, no.
Lord PALMERSTON—I appeal to the speech, and re-
peat my assertion. The right hon. gentleman must know
that every messenger or packet that brings public despatches
brings also a private and confidential letter in which various
circumstances are mentioned which are often not of suffi-
cient importance to be placed in the form of a despatch, and
in which communications are made of matters received in
conversation which it would be impossible to lay on the
table of the house—as all despatches are liable to be laid—
without placing the agent by whom the letters are written
in a situation in which he would lose all information so
essential to the public service. The right hon. gentleman,
therefore, has not established his case that my noble friend
has departed froni the usual course in drawing a marked
line between private letters and public despatches. The
right hon. gentleman talked of these despatches as letters,
whereas they were not letters but despatches, and the right
hon. gentleman should remember to apply the proper word
to the proper thing. That which my noble friend produced
were despatches sent to the Foreign Office; that which he
declines to produce are private letters.
Mr. DISRAELI—What I said was this, that no Minis-
ter should lay on the table of the house despatches refer-
ring to private letters unless those private letters could be
produced. If, as in this case, the papers do refer to private
letters, they must be of an important public nature or they
would not be referred to, then they ought to be produced.
Mr. HORSMAN said he was glad to hear what the noble
lord had said at the conclusion of his speech. He agreed
that on occasions like thin the Tiretca of Conexiona oould not
tro too caren..l; out there W 0,13 occasions when it became
the duty of Parliament to interfere. He apprehended that
this was one of those cases. They knew that the Emperor
of the French was peculiarly amenable to public opinion,
especially to the public opinion of England, which carried
greater weight upon the Continent than the despatches of
Ministers. Therefore, if they had discussed this question
at an earlier period, and if the house had expressed a broad
opinion upon the policy of her Majesty's Ministers he be-
lieved that it would have had a great effect in averting
some of those events which they had now to de-
plore. His hon. friend the member for Bridgwater had
come forward weeks ago to forewarn them, and on all
occasions he was told that it would bo impolitic to enter into
the discussion. They,wero told that it would be, better if
they left it to the Government to deal with the Emperor of
the French—(hear, hear)—and yet, now that which they
had feared had come to a head ; and the fact that the Go-
vernment were now in communication, and very properly so,
With the Great Powers of Europe, showed that we were
approaching something similar to a crisis which he thought
an early discussion might have averted. He had heard the
speech of the noble lord at the head of the Government last
week with regeet, for the noble lord wont out of his way to
apologise for and eulogise the Emperor of the French.
The SPEAKER called the hon. gentleman to order,
informig him that he could not refer to past debates.
Mr. HORSMAN said he thought he could refer to past
debates on the same subject.
The SPEAKER said the hon. gentleman was wrong.
This was a discussion on the motion for theadjournment.
Mr. lIORSMAN said he was addressing himself to the
affairs of Italy, and last week the noble lord said he had
received a despatch from M. Thouvenel—(loud cries of
Order, order)—in which it was announced that the annexa-
tion of Savoy was about to take place without consultation
with the other great Powers of Europe; and yet they had
received shortly before from the head of the Government
as explicit declaration to the contrary effect.
The SPEAKER again called the right hoe. gentleman
to order for his continued references t 3 a past debate.
Mr. lIORSMAN said thathe would not further allude to
that speech, but he would say that while they were refrain-
ing from discussing that question for a whole month, the
annexation was progresaing. ((Hear hear.)
Mr. BAILLIE COCHItANE said he deeply regretted
that we had not had a full discussion on this subject. He
had received letters frem a gentleman in Savoy, regretting
that the British Parliament had not taken the matter up,_
and stating that nine-tenths of the population were opposed
to the annexation, and that the result of the conduct of the
noble lord at the head of the Government was, that this
country was losing its prestige in Piedmont. He hoped that
a full debate would yet, ensue before the annexation was
irrevocably carried out.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, on
the part of his noble friend, who, by the forms of the house
could not speak again on the subject, that his noble friend
was not aware of having done more than having stated to
the house what was unquestionably a scatter of fact, viz.,
that there was a declaration on the part of the Emperor of
the French of his intention to consult the great Powers of
Europe ash respect to the annexation of Savoy; and the
construction which the noble lord put upon that de•
somethingclaration was very different from what had
taken place. He thought it was necessary, on the part
of thb Government, to say one word with respect to what
had fallen from his right honourable friend, because from
what they had heard they might really have sup-
posed thin the name of Savoy had never been men-
tioned during the last six weeks. It was true that there
had been no thoroughgoing discussion on the subject of a
nature to terminate in a full and satisfactory expression of
opinion. The right hon. gentleman opposite thought it
would have been better if there had been a full discussion--
that might be true ; but there had been repeated partial
discussions. Speeches had been delivered in that house in
which the strongest language had been used in reference to
the whole subject; many judgments had been pronounced
and epithets used, and descriptions given, which might have
bed a very powerful, add, possibly, might hereafter have a
detrimental influence on the state of public feeling in a
neighbouring, country. But that the right hon. gentleman
(Mr. Horsinan) had bcrno a leading part in these discus-
sions, he would have thought that he had been unaware of
them. No one hail been more precipitate than the right
hon. gentleman, who hid used language which could have
no other effect than that of inflaming those to whom it was
addressed, and which would tend to produce an angry state
of feeling, and a sense insult, which was the most likely
of all possible states of mind to drive France on to a preci •
pirate course of action. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. ROE BUCK—Members of that house wore in a diffie
cult poition in regard :o foreign affairs. Sometimes they
were told when they iiterferod, that they were too soon,
and when they came a, little later they were told they
were too late. (Hear, lease) That was their exact posi-
tion on this occasion. lie noble lord had stated its that
house that the Einpererof the French would take no steps
for the annexation of :isvoy end Nice without consulting
the great. Powers; the roble hal had said that that was
the statement of the Eimeror of the French ; but he (Mr.
Roebuck) would boldly ay that the question of Savoy and
Nice was settled, and Wtlrout nu reference whatever to
the great Powers. If his were the case, what influence
ought it to have on Heir estimatloa of the value of the-
statements made in tint quarter? Ho held them very
cheap, even before this glace-unit— (chew and laughter)--
and now, fC.er the very candid acknowledgment by the
noble lord at the head of the Government, there was no ex-
pression of worthlessuesswhich would adequately convey
his estimation of them. (Hear, hear, end laughter.) •
Mr. HORSMAN dude( having made use of exesperat-
ing or insulting language sn the subject.
Mr. MONCKITON MINES said he believed that a full
discussion even now wou'd be of the greatest advantage to
Europe. He had for a long time looked upon the annexa-
tion of Savoy to Fronce th inevitable. •
REBUKE BY MDISTERS TO MEMBERS.
Mr, KiNaLAKE said he could not burexpress his sur-
prise at the Charge made by the right hon. gentleman the

Chancellor of the Exchequer against his right hon. friend
the member for Stroud. It was the right of every hon.
member of that house to comment on the conduct of poten-
tates, and he did not see anything in what his right hon.
friend (Mr. Horsman) had said that could justify the right
hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the
manner in which he exuressed himself to his right hon. friend ;
and before he (Mr. Kinglake) sat down he should express
his surprise at the language used by the right hon. gentleman,
who said, with something like fear, that the language used
by hon. members in that house might give offence to the
Emperor of the French. He must protest against the no •
tion that the tone and language of that house was to be
regulated by considerations in reference to what the Em-
peror of the French might think of it. (Hear, hear.)
FRAUDS IN THE COLLECTION OF INCOME-TAX.
On the order of the day being read for going into com-
mittee of ways and means,
Mr. AYRTON said he wished to call the attention of the
Government to a subject of very serious importance in ebn-
' flexion with the collection of the income-tax in the parish of
St. Leonard's, Shereditch. It appeared from a petition
which had been presented from the inhabitants that the
management of the income-tax in that p' rich was under the
control of commissioners and a surveyor appointed by the
Crown, but that those commissioners appointed collectors to
collect the tax. The petitioners stated further that a con-
spiracy was entered into between the surveyor and the col-
lectors for the purpose of defrauding the inhabitants and
her Majesty's Government. The nature of the conspiracy
was that the collectors should deliver to the inhabitants
notices of charge at a higher rate than the surveyor entered
upon the roll which was approved of by the commissioners
and transmitted to the Government, and that they should
appropriate to themselves the difference between the two
accounts. When the fraud was discovered the surveyor
absconded, and it did not appear that any steps were taken
either by the local commissioners or by the Commissioners
Of Inland Revenue to have him apprehended ; one of the
collectors was arrested and indicted for obtaining money
under false pretences. That indictment was tried at the
Central Criminal Court, but it seemed that the conduct of
the prosecution was not entrusted to any counsel of emi •
Hence, and the result was that the prisoner was acquitted
upon some technical ground.
• The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER •said no
person could appreciate the motives of the hon. member in
bringing the case, to which he had called attention, under
the consideration of the house more than he did. There
were two points of view in which the question was-to be con-
sidered, and one of them was that it was not shown that
the inhabitants in the parish in question had been sub-
jected to a higher assessment than others and than was
fair. The other point was that it was desirable that the in-
habitant ratepayers throughout the country should take an
interest in the manner in which the revenue of the country
was collected. He did not think that the grievance com-
plained of had been overstated in some reepects, and he
was glad to think it was not a common one. It was his
intention, in the course of the present session, to propose
en-act of Parliament to remedy the anomaly, that the col-
lection of those taxes should be brought under the direc-
tion, control, and responsibility of the Government.
(Hear, hoar.)
The question of the adjournment was then agreed to.
WAYS AND MEANS.—THE INCOME TAX.
The order of the day for going into Committee of Ways
and Means having been read and agreed to.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in using
to move the income tax resolution, said that he should
merely place the resolution in the hands of the chairman,
without any lengthened explanation; because, in point of
fact, in the course of these discussions on the budget and
the treaty of commerce, almost all the general topics had
been very considerably dealt with. The exact state of the
case was, that according to the calculations which he made
on the 10th of February, the revenue, as then anticipated,
on the supposition that the house would vote the minor
'charges and the income tax, as stated in the resolution,
would give him a probable surplus of £400,000. He need
hardly say, also, that if a reduction of a penny were made
in the tax, it would leave a positive deficiency of about the
same amount, instead of a surplus.
Lord W. GRAHAM observed that, in stating hisbudget
to the house the right hon. gentleman had adverted to the
possibility of an extinction of the income tax by the reduc-
tion of the military and naval establishments of the coun-
try. Looking at the state of Europe, however, and parti -
cularly as the act of spoliation and aggrandisement which
was soon about to be consummated, it became more than
ever the duty of the country to maintain an attitude of
armed watchfulness. It was an evasion, therefore, on the
part of the right hon. gentleman, to ask for the tax only
for a single year. The hon. gentleman had thrown away
large amounts of indirect taxation with such a lavish
hand, that there was no hope from that source of any re-
duction in the tax. Nor was it to be effected, that he could
see, by Iry reduction in the armaments of the country.
The estimate for the military expenditure, it was known,
was not adequate for the defence of the country, and the
right hon. gentleman had only asked for a portion of the
Chinese expenditure, proposing te:make up the deficiency
by some hccus peens mystification between the Indian
Treasury and the Downing-street Exchequer. It was
pretty clear, however, that the house might expect to be
told one day that all the money was spent, and that more
must be had. The right hon. gentleman used to pride him-
self at one time upon acting upon Conservative principles.
This, however, was no Conservative principle, but he rather
thought it one that was pregnant with rashness and im-
providence.
Mr. W. MARTIN said that the tax in future years
would become unnecessary if there should no longer be oc-
casion to maintain our naval and military establishments at
their present extraordinary amount. To satisfy themselves
that such a reduction was possible, they had no need to go
back to the year 1835, so frequently taken as a model year
of finance, but if they would take the estimates of the year
1857, when the military service of the country was admi-
rably provided for by the hon. and gallant gentleman the
member for Huntingdon, they would see that their object
might be readily attained. In that year the sum voted for
the two great services was rather more than £19,000,000;
at present it was more than £29,000,000. That arose, no
doubt, from the necessary permanent investment of a large
capital, but were they to go on for ever making Enfield rifles
and Armstrong guns ? Was there never to be a limit for
them to reach in this tremendous expenditure in time of
peace ? If there were not, then he agreed with the noble
lord opposite, the member fur Hereford, that there was no
hDpe for the extinction of the income tax. It was a war
tax, and we virtually had war estimates, and in that cha-
racter he was willing to recognise the necessity of it; but
next year, whoever may be the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, he would see whether an end could not be put to this
expenditure. The quest ion would be if £20,000,000 was not
enough for the defence of the country. If it were not, then the
income tax was the only means of meeting the heavy cost of
our defences; and he was sure the country would not much
longer endure it in its present form. All men were heartily
tired of a tax which united in itself every possible objection
that could be urged against taxation. It was his firm opinion
that if their armaments were largely reduced, the income
tax might be very speedily removed. (Hear.)
Mr. GARNETT said he rose chiefly to explain a misap-
prehension which existed as to the nature of the motion
which he intended to submit at a future stage of this sub-
ject. The proposal of the right hon, gentleman was that
incomes under £l5O should pay 7d. in the pound. His (Mr.
Garnett's) motion would be that that rate should be ex-
tended to incomes as high as £5OO. He had come to the
conclusion that £5OO was too high, and he thought it would
be better to extend the exemption to incomes under £3OO,
with the twofold object of relieving the greatest number of
individuals at the least possible loss to the revenue. Tak-
ing- the income tax returns -which were issued last July, it
will be found upon examination that the number of persons
under schedule D paying income tax on incomes between
£l5O and £2OO were 41,031; upon incomes between £2OO
and £3OO, 33,611; but when they came to incomes between
£3OO and £4OO, there was a great drop, the number being
15,591. Taking the number of persons assessed under
schedule E, the falling off was still more remarkable, the
number of persons paying on incomes between £l5O and
£2OO was 11,521, between £3OO and £4OO, 10,484, and be-
tween £4OO and £5OO, 4,931. Therefore, in asking the right
hon. gentleman to extend the exemption to incomes below
£3OO, the amount lost would be £231,723, and there would
be a very large number of persons relieved from the burden
at that small cost to the exchequer. His main motive in
bringing forward this proposition was to relieve persons of
moderate means and precarious incomes, and to place them
linden the minimum rate. He hoped that the Chancellor
of the Exchequer would be able out of his surplus to spare
that relief to a deserving and heavily burdened class of the
community.
Sir C. NAPIER could not allow the hon. member (Mr.
W. Martin) to indulge in the mistaken notion that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer would be enabled next year
to reduce the income tax on account of what had been
already spent on the army and the navy. The tax would
not be one farthing less next year on that ground. We had
certainly got a new wooden navy, and very fine ships they
were • but who could guarantee that they would be para-
mount,' and not have to be replaced by an iron navy. The
French were already building iron ships, six of them being
now in progress, and we had commenced following them, as
ono iron ship at least was now building. If that was the
case we would have to construct new docyards of immense
size for the building of the new ships. In addition, the pre-
sent navy would have tube new gunned with Armstrong's
or Whitworth's guns, at an immense expense, and if the
.Secretary of the Admiralty had been present he would have
asked him how soon that could be done. He did not believe
that at present we could "gun" more than one or two ships
with Armstrong's guns. The coat of the war with China
would be far greater than had been estimated, and if the
French Government went on building ships of war at the
rate they did, we must build as fast or faster, because we
had a greater number of colonies and a larger commerce to
protect than France. (Hear.) The only way he could see to
any future reduction in the income tax was that the Go-
vernment should act on the principle advocated by Mr.
Cobden in that house, and enter into an arrangement with
the French Emperor at what point they should stop build-
ing ships. If that was not done, the house and the country
might depend upon it that the income tax next year would
not be less than Is. or Is. 3d. Europe wasin a moat unset-
tled and unsatisfactory state. No one knew how far the
Emperor of the French would go. For his own part, ho
believed he meant mischief, and under these circumstances
hey must not indulge in any unfounded expectations of the
•eduction of the income tax. (Hear, hear.)
Sir S. NORTHC •TE complained that the usual course
rad been departed from in voting taxes in ways and
'leans, before they knew really what the expenditure of
he year actually was. Indeed, the whole course pursued
appeared to him most objectionable. Take the vote for
China, which was pressed forward at a late hour, and
which his right hon. and gallant friend the late Sccretaryfor
War had questioned, subsequently, as to its accuracy. That
vote was for the year 1860-61, but to meet a deficiency in
the year 1859-60, and as that deficiency had been differently
stated at £1,170,000, while the vote taken was for t 850,000,
it was clear that there was a discrepancy somewhere. He
must say it was extremely difficult to follow these estimates,
but from some experience at the Treasury, he looked with
considerable dis:rest at all estimates that came from the
War-office. (Hear, hear.) lie knew that, when last in
Alice, he found the military authorities extremely reluctant
to admit that there was ally deficiency. when it turned out
afterwards that the 'deficiency was actually upwards of a
million. He would be glad, therefore, to hear either from
the Chancel or et the Exchequer or the Secretary to the
Treasury that they had satisfied their on a minds as to the
accuracy of the estimates connected with Chine. (Hear.)
fie said this became) he felt that there were many points on
which it was important the house should have information.
Was there any truth in the statement that a large loan was
to be raised for the purpose of fortifying our coasts? Was
that loan to be £20,000,000, or £1,000,000; and if it was
'either, how was the interest to be paid ? They ought tq
know whether it was inters led to ask for such le eel% and not
have it brought forward late iu the year as a supplemental
estimate. Than the Chancellor of the Exchequer had pro-
mised that there would be a diminution in the cost of the

civil service of £350,000; he should like to know whether
►
that would be a real or only an apparent reduction. They
were justified in being critical in asking questions, because
the budget had been brought forward in a shape which
threw a larger amount of burdens on the people than they
could see at first. The Chancellor of the Exchequer anti-
cipated the income of the next year by taking up the large
sum of £1,400,000 of malt and hop credits. He proposed,
besides, to collect three-quarters of the increased income-
tax within the year, which would, in fact, be equivalent
to a tax of 15d., instead of the nominal amount of
10d. The practice hitherto had been to collect a half-year's
income tax within the year, which would have taken from
the taxpayer sd. this year, whereas he would have to pay
71d. if three-quarters were collected. In addition to thus
imposing heavier burdens on the taxpayers, the Chancellor
of the Exchequer was collecting, for the purposes of this
year, money, which, according to the practice hitherto, be-
longed to the next, and that would necessitate a repetition
of the same course. (Hear, hear.) Another subject on
which he would like to hear some explanation from the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, was as to the amount paid by
tenant-farmers under schedules A and B. He certainly
could not reconcile the statements he had made with the
facts in the returns, which returns showed that this class
of taxpayers had contributed of late a much larger increase
in proportion than those under schedules D and E. It
might be owing to the fact that the class was larger and
richer, but an explanation was required. There was another
consideration of a painful character connected with the con-
tinuance of the income tax, and that was the frauds com-
mitted by those who assessed themselves. The higher the
tax was made the greater would those frauds become. It
should also be borne in mind that we had not by any means
arrived at the limit of expenditure on our army and navy.
With the great improvements almost hourly brought to
light in materials both of naval and military warfare, where
the limit of invention was beyond the possibility of con-
ception, they could not draw the lino, and to stop in the
career of expense was, he feared, impossible. It had been
laid down by the First Lord of the Admiralty, and was
assented to by the hon. member for Rochdale, that the
strength of our navy should be in proportion to the strength
of the navies of France and Russia. If circumstances ad-
mitted, the war duties on tea and sugar should be removed
next year. They had been told, however, that the next re-
formed Parliament would be of an economical character, and
that they would not put up with extravagance. Upon what
giound was that expectation formed ? The large expenditure
for the maintenance of our army and navy raised wages and
benefited the population. The labsuring classes were in a
mere comforfable and betters position than before. Was it
reasonable then to suppose that a Parliament elected by the
extended suffrage given to the working classes would be
anxious to cut down expenditure as some supposed ? His
fear was that they would throw more of the burthen on the
upper classes and realised property. The danger was con-
siderably aggravated by voting the income tax from year
to year. He was anxious to maintain the credit of the
country as well as the balance of revenue and expenditure.
He was ready to vote the sum called for that night by the
Caancellor of the Exchequer, but he sincerely hoped it was
the last year that they would be called upon to vote the in-
come tax for one year only.
Sir M. PETO said that his constituents did not object so
much to the amount of the income tax as to the mode in
which it was levied. There ought to be a thorough and
sifting inquiry with a view to an equalisation of the impost,
and although they might not succeed in doing perfect jus-
tice, yet they' could accomplish that which he called rough
justice. In his opinion there ought to be three gradations
—fixed property, those trades in which capital was em-
ployed, and incomes where no capital whatever was em-
ployed. The house was bound, in his opinion, to press on
the Government the importance of looking at question
carefully and fully, and then they would have the satisfac-
tion of knowing that they had effected the largest amount
of justice before they consented to another renewal of the
tax. The hon. baronet the member for Stamford had de-
scribed the budget as a peculiar budget. The measure was
universally acceptable to the country. Iniividual com-
plaints were urged against some of the details, but still the
financial scheme met with approval as a whole. He would
not be prepared next year to assent to the imposition of the
income tax without the fullest consideration being given as
to the mode in ;which it was to be levied. As a whole he
accepted the budget, and he should vote for the income tax
dist year with very great pleasure.
- Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said that he had given notice
of an amendment, namely, to reduce the proposed amount
of income tax from. 10d. to 9d. and in order that the dis-
cussion might take a practical form he intended taking the
sense of the committee on his amendment. They had two
propositions to consider. Were £70,000,000 necessary to
defray the expenditure of the country, and then, if such an
amount of income must be raised, was that income to be
made up by a tenpenny income tax ? Let the committee con -
sider that they had no question of a war or great public crisis
that required the imposition of an additional income tax.
The deficit was artificially or intentionally created by her
Majesty's Government. He had not opposed the repeal of
the taxes proposed by the Government, though he thought
that some of those taxes, as sources of revenue, were thrown
away. We had thrown away revenue upon high class wines,
and he did not think it was wise to rest the revenue upon a
few articles. He admitted that the house having agreed to
the budget, it was bound to find a substitute for the defi-
ciency created in thd revenue by it. But he must say that
the income tax was a most unjust equivalent to meet that
deficiency ; for the tax was a most inquisitorial one. In
1842, when Sir Robert Peel had great difficulties to con-
tend with to adjust the finances of the country, the noble
lord the member for the City of London expressed his de-
termination to oppose the proposal for the imposition of an
income tax, because he considered it to be an inquisitorial
tax, and ought not to be had recourse to except in a
time of war, and the noble lord moved a resolution to that
effect, in which he was supported by the whole Whig
party. (Hear, hear.) He (Sir H. Willoughby) could not
assent to the principle that the expenditure of the country
ought necessarily to be £70,000,000. Why should we
imitate the expenditure of France in our dockyards, and
such like establishments. Indeed, he thought the expen-
diture of the country was too great. But of all the modes
of meeting this expenditure the most objectionable was
the income tax. It was an unequal and odious tax, and
those who proposed it were bound to make out a case for
its imposition. He begged, in conclusion, to move an
amendment that the; income tax for the year be 9d. instead
of 10d. (Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
noble lord who had commenced the discussion said it was a
delusion to ask them to vote the income tax for one year
only. The reason why they had asked for the tax for one
year was, that they might preserve to Parliament the pre-
sent control over the expenditure of the country. There was
no delusion in that. An hon. gentleman said he had voted
•for the income tax because he thought the tax would wholly
cease next year. The gallant admiral, the member for
Southwark, had corrected what had been wrong in that too
sanguine expectation, Accoriing to him, they had nothing
to look forward to, if his prophecies were to be trusted, but
the addition of several millions every year to the navy esti-
mates, and every year they were to be told that their provi-
sion was totally insufficient for the navy estimates of the
country. He thought it would be better not to accede to
either of those views. The gallant admiral ought to bear in
mind that there were limits to the endurance of taxation,
and that men had not been created for the sole purpose of
the navy. The hon, member for Stamford said that they had
given every source-of revenue, but the hon, gentleman
ought to recollect that revenue and expenditure ought to go
together. His hon. friend the member for Finsbury asked
if they would go into a committee of the house to con-
sider whether the income tax could not be so constructed
as to press less heavily on the productive classes. The-sub-
ject was a proper ono to consider, but he could not give his
hon. friend any hope that the inquiry would be successful
for the purpose intended. It was his opinion that if the
income tax was to be continued as a right for several years,
that it would be a fair subject of consideration how far it
could be made to press less burdensome upon the lower
classes. This occurred in the time of Pitt, when
a modification of the tax was made in reference
to incomes of £2OO a year. The hon. baronet
had already seen the views and temper of the
house. He knew that the army and navy estimates
had been before the house, and that the number of men in
the army and navy had been agreed to. Passing to the
civil list, it was proposed to make a reduction in the mis-
cellaneous estimates • but upon that point he could not
make further explanations, and he could not perceive how,
by means of committees, any very important reductions
could be made. It was by means of the public feeling that
reductions could be effected. The prevailing tone that
night had been that as regarded the war with China the
estimates had been insufficient, and in that opinion the late
Secretary_ for War (General Peel) had said that ho coin-
cided. Now, that fact appeared to him (the Chancellor of
the Exchequer) to be a sufficient answer to certain objec-
tions which had been made. Now,it was the duty of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to see that the estimates he
proposed were sufficient estimates, and when they had for-
tunate years, when the revenue exceeded the expenditure,
it was the duty of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to take
care to have a surplus, so as to reduce the debt to some ex-
tent. (Hear, hear.) If the house were to decide in favour
of the motion of the hon. baronet it would be departing
The
el
from the prudent policy which should be pu:s2uo:ood.oayear.
pease of law reforms had been complained of, and it was possible that the changes proposed by the Attorney.Ge oral
would entail an expense for some time a
Now that plan had been received by the country with a due
regard to the distinguished powers of the man by whom it
was proposed ; but that was no reason why the hon. gen-
tleman should seek to cut away from them resoumes to the
amount of £7,000 or £B,OOO a year. The hon, baronet
had shown no ground why his amendment should be
agreed to. He said why throw away one million and a
half of the paper duty ? His (the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer's) answer was, that if the hon. baronet had taken
the trouble to examine the returns he would have seen
that the drawback was included on paper that was ex-
ported, besides Jie expense of collecting and the ex-
pense for paper used in the public service. It was cer-
tainly a large revenue, but it must be recollected that the
house had determined to part with it by a large majority.
He put it to the house to say whether the provision in the
resolution was not a provision Which Would enable them to
go through the service of the year. (Hear, hear.) As to
the war with China, it was impossible to propose a very ac •
curate sum. The change which had been made in the In-
dian Government threw Upon this country an amount
which would have been pros hied for by the Indian Exche-
quer, and taking into account that the operation of the war
might be avoided, he did not think they would have been
warranted in coming to Parliament for a larger sum than
they had asked. M (Hear T
h)
r. VANSITTAR said he had looked forward this
year, in common with the public in general, to find that the
income tax would have been abolished, and he could not
approve of the rashness of creating a deficit of nearly four
millions in order that certain parties who were favourable
to the Government might be conciliated. Upwards of two
millions would soon fall in of terminable annuities, which
would have enabled the right hon. gentleman to apply one-
half to the reduction of the income tax, and the other half
to the reduction of the war duties upon tea and sugar. Al-
ready the people were protesting against the policy of the
Government.
Mr, E. ELLICE, sen., said he should vote with the hem
baronet, because he believed that the income tax was ono
of the worst taxes that could be imposed, and because he
was of opinion that, as compared with other taxes, the
choice lay decidedly in favour of the repeal of the incAne
I ix. (Hear, bear,)
1 The committee then divided, and the numbers were—
For the amendment
Affai4st it
Majority
—55
Ur. W. E. DUNCOMBE said the right hon. gentleman
hat failed to show any reason far changing the entire
'purse of policy which he had adopted in 1853. He had
not given a single Valid reason why he had come down to
l!alliAl?#.11‘ %it beak° this extraordinary claim upon their