The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-27 00:00:00

THE EARLDOM OF WILTES.

Among the new peerage claims which will come
before the Committee of Privileges in the House of
Lords during the present session is one which, if
admitted to be " made out" to their lordships' satis-
faction, will so far create a revolution in the British
peerage as to dispossess the Earl of Shrewsbury of
the honours of the premier earldom of England,
which he has so recently acquired by the decision
of the law. The claimant of the earldom of Wiltes,
or Wiltshire, is Mr. Simon Thomas Scrope, of
Danby-on-Yore, Yorkshire, wbo in the year 1858
presented a petition to the Queen, " praying her
Majesty to be pleased to cause a writ of summons
to Parliament to be issued to him by the title and
dignity aforesaid." Hcr Majesty was pleased to
refer the said petition, together with the Attorney-
General's report thereon, to the House of Peers on
the 7th of June, 1859, who on the same day referred
it to the Committee of Privileges to consider and
report upon it." The printed statement of the pe-
titioner recites, first, how the earldom of Wiltes
was created by letters patent in 1397, in the 21st
year of Richard 11., in the person of Sir William
Scrope, Knight, eldest son of Sir Richard Scrope,
first Lord Scrope of Bolton, " to him and to his heirs
male for ever ;" and urges that, though the said earl-
dom has never been assumed since the death of the
first earl, sine prole, in 1399, yet that, as it was
granted with remainder, not to the heirs male of
his body, but " to him and his heirs male for ever,"
such remainder includes the issue of the earl's
next brother, who succeeded his father as
Lord Scrope of Bolton, and transmitted that
barony to his descendants. The direct line of the
seventh Lord Serape ended in 1630, on the death of
the 11th lord (who was created Earl of Sunderland)
without issue male, when the right to the family
honours descended to the heirs male of Mr. John
Scrope, of Haineldon, Bucks, and Spennithorne,
Yorkshire (the sixth lord's second son), namely,
Francis Scrope, of Spennithorne, and of Danby-on-
Yore, Yorkshire, who, dying without issue, trans-
mitted his claim to the heirs male of his brother
Christopher Scrope, from whom the present
claimant is directly descended in the fifth genera-
tion. Besides the question above incidentally
alluded to, the petitioner in his " case" raises the
question whether the execution of the Earl of Wiltes
by the Duke of Lancaster, afterwards Henry IV.,
at Bristol, operates as an act of attainder, and
strongly urges on his own behalf that the judgment
under which that unfortunate nobleman was exe-
cuted contains no express forfeiture of his dignity
as a peer of the realm, and that the law is, that in
order to forfeit a peerage in tail, there must be
either a formal conviction for high treason, or an
act of attainder and deprivation striking at the
dignity by name. "In this case," says Mr. Scrope,
" the execution of the earl by the Duke of Lancas-
ter could not have the legal force of a direct attain-
der, while the entry on the roll makes no mention
of his dignity as an earl, and therefore could not
deprive his representatives of it. In support of
this curious and interesting claim, Mr. Scrope re•
cites in his " case" an abundant store of learned
extracts from the rolls of Parliament, writs of sum-
mons, the herald's visitations in Yorkshire, the
entries in the parish registers in Thornton-
Steward and Spennithorne, family wills and mar-
riage settlements, bills in Chancery, pedigrees,
leases, releases, deed polls, charters, and sepulohral
monuments, extending down to the present time,
from the date when, according to no less an
,autho-
rity than Shakspere—
" The Earl of Wiltehire held this realm in farm."
The family. of Mr. Scrope have been uninter-
rupted in their adherence to the Roman Catholic
religion, and, curiously enough, the records of the
fines levied on his ancestorsas " Popish recusants"
are pressed by the claimant into his service as
proofs of his position. They have largely inter-
ularri,c&iffowitra, htlmieaxMweelylns, dcallns, Constables,othernoble Roman S tri ck
lnds
Catholic families, and are widely and deservedly
respected in Yorkshire, as not unworthy represen-
tatives of a family as ancient as the reign of Ed-
ward the Confessor, and which, in the -period of
300 years which intervened between the reigns of
Edward 11. and Charles 1., produced two earls, 20
barons, one chancellor, four high treasurers, two
chief justices of England, five knights of the garter,
and numerous " bannercts"—the highest military
order in the days of chivalry—besides two arch-
bishops and one bishop. It is worth note that tes-
timony was borne to the knightly descent of the
Scrope family, so far back as the year 1386, in the
celebrated controversy between Sir Richard Scrope
and Sir Robert Grosvenor for the right of bearing
a coat of arms, when it was deposed and formally
established, according to Sir Harry Nicholas, that
the then representative of the house of Scrope was
" descended from noble and generous blood of
gentry and noble ancestry, who had always pre-
served their name and estate in dignity and ho-
-1 noun" The present claimant was born in 1790,
, and married to a daughter of the late Mr. John
i Jones, of Llanarth, by whom he has surviving
issue a son, and also two daughters, tho elder of
f whom is the widow of the late Mr. Bastard, of
Kitley.

[Continued from our first page.]
keep ourselves apart from the other nations of Europe—
(loud cheers from both sides of the house)—but that, when

future questions may arise—as future questions may arise

—we should be ready to act with others and to declare,
always in the most moderate and friendly terms, but still

firmly, that the settlement of Europe, the peace of Europe,
is a matter dear to this country, and that settlement and
that peace cannot be assured if it is liable to perpetual in-
terruption—(loud cheers)—to constant fears, to doubts and

rumours with respect to the annexation of this one coun-
try, or the union and connexion of that other—but that the
Powers of Europe, if they wish to maintain that peace, must
respect each other's rights, must respect each other's limits,
and, above all, restore and not disturb that commercial con-
fidence which is the result of peace, which tends to peace,
and which ultimately forms the happiness of nations.

(Loud cheers.)
Lord J. MANNERS said the cheers which rang through
the whole house when the noble lord made the observa-
tions with which he concluded his speech furnished a com-
plete justification of the hon. gentleman who had originated
that discussion. (Hear.) lie could only say, for one, that
when he heard that portion of the noble lord's speech he
hailed it as an augury that her Majesty's Government

•
were about to return to those alliances and that friendly

co-operation with the other Powers of Europe which, in his
opinion, ought. never to have been for one moment dis-
turbed. (Cheers.) The announcement just made by the
noble lord was of such paramount importance, and fraught
with, such infinite gratification to all lovers of their coun-

try, that he was quite content to overlook anything that
could raise controversy in the previous parts of his speech.
(Hear, hear.) Having front the first taken a deep interest

in this question, he (Lord J. Manners) could not sit down

without expressing his thanks to the honourable mem-
ber for Bridgewater, the honourable baronet the member

for Tamworth, 'and the right honourable gentleman the

member for Stroud, for the bold and honest stand they
bad made, and the thoroughly English spirit they had

neanifested in bringing this subject under the consideration
of the house. (Hear.) The noble lord had given utterance
to that which would vibrate from one end of England to
the other ; and, if it became their duty to discuss this ques-
tion again, he trusted they would do so in the spirit of the
noble lord's concluding observations, and that the country
would feel they might still have confidence in the manner
in which eur foreign policy was conducted. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT—I am unable to say how many times this
subject has been before the house during the last month,

but I am sure it has been more times than was eonvenieni

for the house, or for the despatch .of public business.
(Oh, oh.) I may not have been able to remember all the
speeches that I have heard made, nor to recollect all I have
read of those which I have not heard on this subject; but
I have come to this conclusion, that those gentlemen who
have been so anxious to introduce this question to the house
have entirely avoided that which appears to me the most
important point—viz., what clear and direct interest this

house has in the matter under discussion. I contend that

we are hero for the interests of England. (Oh, oh.)
repudiate altogether the views of the hon. baronet the
member for Tamworth, whose interest is clearly of the
warmest with regard to Switzerland. I repudiate the course
taken by the hon. member for Bridgewater, who has taken
Sardinia under his particular care. (No, no.) Now that
Sardinia is proved to be the only Power that is not trust-
worthy in this matter, the hon. gentleman probably wishes
to discourage discussion. I repudiate the course taken by the
right hon. gentleman below me (Mr. Horsman), who appears
to find every question p suitable one for attacking the mem-
bers of the Government; I am here as the representative of a
great English constituency, who have no kind of business
with this question except in so far as it affects thd honour
and interest of England. (Hear, hear.) I can conceive men,
being great Englishmen—and I am astonished that it has
not struck some of these ingenious gentlemen in their re-
searches on this question—viewing very favourably the
transfer of Savoy to France, and I will give one reason why
I think England should rather be glad at it. Sardinia
agrees to the transfer as a compensation to France. Has
it not been matter of talk among Englishmen and in all the
clubs during the last year that Sardinia has been placed in
the power of France, and that in consequence France has
been aggrandised by the acquisition of Sardinia in an
almost perpetual alliance ? But if Sardinia be able by the
cession of what may be called politically a worthless pro-
vince—(oh, oh)—understand me, I say "worthless" poli-
tically only—if Sardinia has compensated France by the
cession of that territory, and has, therefore, disengaged
herself from any feeling, of what I may say created that
supremacy of France in consequence of what France had
done for her in the Italian war, then I say, on your own
principles and on the policy of the noble lord, that Eng-
land should be glad that the score had been settled in this
manner rather than that for the future Sardinia should
consider herself greatly indebted to France, and bound by
a perpetual political alliance with that country. (Hear.)
France is now acknowledged even by the right hon. gen-
tleman near me to have acted in the transaction with per-
fect good faith. (Oh, oh !) I thought I was stating that
which was admitted on both sides of the house the last time
his matter was discussed. I heard it said by the right
hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli), though I see that gentlemen
opposite have no faith in his statements ; but that he did say
so I call the right hon. gentleman himself to witness. (Hear.)
This house, the English people, and the English press have
for the last nine months been exciting the English Govern-
ment to take that precise course which rendered the cession
of Savoy inevitable, and therefore we are not in a position
to complain of what has taken place. The noble lord has
told us in a manner perfectly charming, when we recollect
the somewhat hot despatches he has written, and the hottssr
despatches gentlemen in this house have desired hire to
write, that' he has communicated with all the Pinvers
who were parties to the treaty of Vienna. It is a &slight-
fal thing when all the Powers of Europe slumber at their
posts that the hon. member for Bridgewater should be
wide awake. (Hear.) No doubt gentlemen opposite fully
appreciate the course he has taken. But the noble lord
tells us that Austria in reply says—Vat ? Why, that no-
body cares about the treaty of Vienna, and when her pro-
vinces were wrested from her they were not taken by treaty,
but by force of arms, and that Europe looked quietly on,
while the English Ministers almost applauded, and the
English people welcomed with enthusiasm every intelli-
gence that was received of the destruction of an Austrian
army in Italy. (Hear.) Then not only is Lombardy taken
from Austria, but those pet duchies over which Austria
has exerted so much influence are also gone, and that
patrimony which is held by Austria to be sacred—the
patrimony of the Pope—is in part wrested from the Papal
Government ; and all this is transferred bodily to Sardinia,
which has tripled in extent since this time last year. All
this has been done with the sanction of the English Go-
vernment and the English people. (" No," from Mr. Bow.
yer.) Did hon. gentlemen opposite, or did the hon. member
for Bridgewater think that the Austrian Government would
join in a quarrel about Savoy when they had not a word to
say when Austria was dismembered ? Then you go to
Russia, and yen ask her to join you. Russia replies, "As
there is no question involved affecting Ihe principles on
which Government rests, it does not concern us." And then,
if you look back seven years, is there any man such an idiot
as to suppose that the Russian Government would step out
of its path to join you upon a miserable question like this ;
remembering 'the course you took with regard to Russia
seven years ago ? Then 1. suppose the noble lord appealed
to Prussia, and the Court of Prussia is pailicularly
allied
to the Court of England, and is, for many reasons besides,
rather disposed to side with England. Well, what is the
answer of the Court of Prussia ? I am not sure that the
noble lord has stated exactly that answer to-night,
but the general impression is that, as the French
Government do not insist upon what are called the natural
boundaries of empires, Prussia has no interest in this ques
tion, and does not desire to take any steps with us. Then
it comes to this,That no one hat any interest in this matter
but England ; and yet every one will admit that whatever
interest England has is necessauily smaller than the interest
of the ether Powers of Europe, for it is sheer folly and child-
ishness to say that we who live in this island have a greater
interest in this question than the great nations which in..
habit the continent of Europe, and which are nearer to that
point whore the boundary touches: But. I ask, who in Eng-
land is so far interested in this matter ? I have looked in
vain to the English press to find any considerable alarm on
this question. There is, of course, some following of the
rumours spread in this house, and there is one newspaper
in London which is celebrated—l should rather say noto-
rious—for a mixture of piety and ruffianism which has never
before been equalled in the press. (Laughter, and cries of
" Name, name I") Day after day that newspaper—(Name I)
endeavours to stir up the passions of this country by vitu-
perating everything connected with the French people and
their Government ; but beyond that I am at a loss to find
any that express any serious alarm about the question. I
do not hesitate to express a suspicion that has filled my
mind. It should be remembered that at this moment there
is in France, as there was in England 150 years ago, a great
question of dynasty. The partisans of deposed dynasties are
restless and unscrupulous; and I am not at all certain that
means have not been taken by those partisans who had no
friendship for England while they were connected with the
Govern
ment of France--means which do not come to the light
of day—for the purpose of influencing the press and public opi-
nion in general throughout England against the existing Go-
vernment of France. And this is done not with any good in-
tentions toward Ewngeln they ende, but for objects good only to a family
or a faction who, h
in it, power,anwdewrehionhave n 0 wereeiclaim
nnot
whateverab le t o
maintain themselves
upon the influence of thiscountry to replace them in the posi-
tion they have lost. (Oh, oh.) I cannot,u I say, find any
one in England who really feels alarm p
question,
and the only people who I believe arereemaolnbt}e-tirinifsoa r
Stroud
state of
great trepidation are the right hon. m
(Mr. Horsman), the hon. member for Bridgewater (Mr.d
Hinglake), and one or two others. (No, no.)
'Well, that
is my opinion. (Laughter.) The right hon. member for
Stroud has this evening touched upon a question Which it
is a great pity that he did not further explain. It occurred
in the right hon. gentleman's defence of freedom of speech.
Now, lam not about to contest that point. The house,
allows me to use freedom in my sr eech. I shall not com-
Pl4in of any one else using it. But the right hon. gentleman
intimated by what he said, that diplomacy having failed,
parliament had power to do something that diplomacy had
not. Well, what has parliament power to do under such

circumstances? It must either succumb, or proceed to a
mode of compulsion which is different from that of diplo-
macy. Did the right hon. gentleman refer to that latter

course P
Mr. HORSMAN said he did not.
Mr. BRIGHT—No; because he has told the house that
he does not mean to make war upon France. But the right
hon. gentleman is determined to make war upon those who
sit on the Treasury benches; and I have not the least ob-
jection to his doing so, though, if the right honourable gen-

tleman will permit me, I will give him a piece of advice.
When he wants to make war upen the Treasury bench, he
should not begin his assault when they are in the right.
(Laughter.) I have been opposed to governments, and I

hope I have on such occasions done something to reader
their position unpleasant —(hear, hear, and laughter)

—but I have always acted upon this plan. Every Govern-
_ _

ment—even that of Lord Derby--sometimes does things
that are right—(laughter)—and then I have always been

happy to give them my support. But on the other hand,

even such governments as that of the noble viscount ara

apt to make great mistakes, and my course has been to attack
them upon those mistakes. (Cheers, and laughter.) But
the right hon. gentleman not only makes war upon the go-

vornment, but upon all the party with whom for the last
20 years it is supposed that ho has been acting. The right
hon. gentleman makes war upon all the past of his own
life; and for a gentleman of his power of debate, of com-
prehending questions, and of being useful both to the House
of Commons and to his country, it is a lamentable thing to

see him committing, as I think, s'o great a mistake. (Cheei:s.)
With regard to the main object at issue, I am opposed to
the house placing itself in the humiliating position which
it has so often of late been invited to occupy—that of bark-
ing when it does not intend to bite. and of making itself,
not the guardian of the powers of Europe, for that would
be foolish and impossible enough—but making itself the
common scold of all Europe. (Cheers and laughter.)
Nothing could be more humiliating, nothing mom hopeless
than such a position. lam not sure that some of our de-
bates, pernicious as they have been in other respects, have
not rather affected the judgment of the noble lord at the
head of foreign affairs. Ido not perhaps quite understand
the observations with which the noble lord closed his
speech—(oh, oh)—but the noble lord opposite (Lord John
Manners), always glad to ally himself with that which ci-
vilisation is day by day departing from, namely, privilege
and despotism—(renewed cries of" oh, oh")—rose imme-
diately to compliment the noble lord the Secretary for Fo-
reign Affairs, and to say, 'what I have heard him say be-
fore, viz., how grateful he felt to the noble lord for the opi-
nions he had expressed, and for the course which the Go-
vernment were about to take. The house are aware that I
have more than once expressed an opinion that a close per-
sonal alliance between the Sovereign of this and the Sove-
reigns of other countries is not, in my opinion, advanta-
geous to England, nor indeed to Europe. I think the noble
lord means to take that course which, in the impartial opi-
nion of every one, must be admitted to be wise and good—
he intends, namely, that the policy of England shall in fu-
ture not be such as to estrange England from any of the
Governments of Europe—that it shall not be such to
France on the one side, or to Austria on, the other, as shall
make one of those powers the embittrired enemy of Eng-
land ; but such as will enable Englaud to take an impartial
position among the Governments of Europe, giving her
opinion, as she is only bound to give it, when the question
does not immediately affect her own interest—only when
she is asked for it. If this were the proper occasion I should
take the noble lord to task for the course which has been
taken with regard to Naples. There is nothing which I
believe is more firmly and more unchangeably established
than that the past policy of England with regard to various
matters connected with the Governments of continental
Europe has been a policy not tending to her honour, not
good for her people, disastrous to her finances, needlessly
meddling, and of no advantage to her whatever. (Opposi-
tion cheers.) lam not asking for a policy of entire and
absolute isolation; but I believe that a policy of isolation
would be better than a policy of incessant meddling.
(Cheers.) I hope the noble lord will take this course—that
he will move with France, when he has to move with her,

clearly, frankly, honourably, and in a manner that cannot
be mistaken. I know the noble lord will never truckle to

any power in Europe, but I hope he will so conduct the
policy of this country that all the nations of Europe may
say that which I believe they have heretofore not said, that
England is a power that regards its own great interests,
namely—that it interferes not in Europe where interference
can be avoided, and that when it does interfere, it inter-
feres, not for the sake of degrading one power or of exalting
another, bait in favour of those great principles of justice
and moderationwhich it is necessary to observe if the peace
of Europe is to be preserved. (Cheers.)
Lord CLAUDE HAMILTON said he could not think it
possible that the statements which had been made by the
hon. gentleman were in accordance with those sentiments
entertained by the English people. If the question of the
annexation of Savoy had been passed over sub silentio they
would be liable to the imputation of giving encouragemerit
to still further encroachments in that course of policy.
England would be wanting in its duties if it did not com-
plain in the strongest terms of the annexation of Savoy.
The hon. gentleman (Mr. Bright) had, however, said. that it
was a matter of very little importance. Did that. hon. mem-
ber wish then to see the glorious republic of Switzerland
shackled on one of its frontiers by a great. military Power
like that of France ? He (Lord C. HarrAton) denied that
tho general sentiments of the people at all accorded with
those which had been expressed by that hon. member. The
subject of complaint wus, that the uoble lord the Secretary
of State for Foreign Affairs had nr.lt raised his voice when he
had first been made aware of tb.e intentions of the French
Government. If they were ellent on such a subject they
would be sanctioning a xae,st odious policy, and would be
worthy of strong condemnation. Ile was bound to say that
the policy pursued by the noble lord at the head of the Go-
vernment, since 1830, when he was called to the Foreign
Office, had been such as to irritate and alienate the old
Allies of England ; and he was rejoiced to hear, by the
speech, of the noble lord (Lord J. Russell), that it was found
necessary to draw closer the intimacy with foreign Powers,
a speech which had been loudlycheered by a crowded house.
(Hear, hear.)
/ Mr. KING LAKE said he was very sure he would not
have addressed them but for the language which had been
used by the hon. member for Birmingham as to the conduct
which he (Mr. Kinglake) had thought proper to pursue
with reference to these transactions. The speech of that
hon. member had been truly characteristic of the man, be-
cause he had disclosed in every sentence the assumed in-
fallibility of his own opinions, and his ignorance of the views
which were entertained by other men. (Hear, hear.)
He (Mr. Kinglake) denied that he had acted in these matters
in the character of a friend of the King of Sardinia, which
the hen. member might have known if he had paid any
attention to what he ,had said when he came down to the
house and disclosed to hon. members the family compact
which had been entered into 'between France and Sardinia.
The hon. member had alleged that those who had spoken
had not shown him how England had any interest in this
matter; but that only showed that he had paid no atten-
tion to the discussions on the subject, for it had been
proved that military considerations made it of great im-
portance that England should endeavour to prevent the an-
nexation of Savoy. (Hear, hear.) He wondered at the
audacity of the hon. gentleman coming forward to give a
military opinion, and speaking with his usual confidence
that Savoy and Nice were early worthless provinces. (Hear,
hear, from the Opposition.) Hon. members in speaking of
these provinces were influenced principally by military con-
siderations, and of course the hon. member must mean that
they were worthless provinces in a military sense—
Mr. BRIGHT.—I said politically.
Mr. KINGLAKE said it must depend on the degree of
strength which these province gave to a nation, and there-
fore it was not right in the hon. member for Birmingham
to speak of them as being worthless in a pelitical sense. The
hon. member had said that there was great danger of the
house degeratitig into the positiOn of being the common
stole of Europe, but the language and the demeanour of the
hon. member was such as would prevent England being the
scold of Europe. (Opposition cheers.) He (Mr. Kinglake)
was glad to say how much he had been gratified with the
speech of the noble lord the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs, and he congratulated himself in being, to some ex -
tent, the cause of that speech bythe notice of motion which
he had given. He was also glad to say that, happily, the
views which he entertained upon so important a subject
were now entertained by the Government. (Hear.)
Sir 11. WILLOUGHBY said he would venture to recall
the attention of the house to the subject which was int-
rn ediately before them when this discussion arose, ho meant
the
in
tax income tax. He had already said he thought it very
doubtful whfeotrhtehrethseakheouosfe waottmldorenottineanbjecicatltoexppaeyriamleOndt..
income
But he thought it Virt9
: now . his duty to make some remark
upon the inequalities which deformed this tax. The
house was aware that s i
was of very unequal pressure,
taken with reference to
in-
stance, with respect to atllhe the variousro sertyhemdulesse. Fheduolre
avlaich included all the land and house property of the
country, people paid the tax upon their gross rental. This
was clearly a great injustice to the
in this country. He proposed, theroewfners, real property
that some. reduc-
tion, by way of per centage, should be°l
made upon this gross
rental, and that the income tax should be
the reduced amount. He begged.aleo to Calculated
ask.on
gentleman whether he had any objection to giveeright lion.
to owners
of landed property a right of appeal to the commissioners.
Sir J. PAK INGTON said that before the right hon. gen-
tleman rose to answer the question, there was one or two
points on which he thought it desirable that he should give
the house some further information than it had yet received.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer having thought fit to im-
pose a 10d. income tax, with a remarkable inconsistency, in
the very year in which he had promised it should cease al-
together, had omitted to state to the house what would be
the estimated proceeds of the tax. He had told the house
what they were to pay, not what he was to reeeive. The
right hon. gentleman, in his statement on the budget, had
estimated the produce of half-a-year's income tax at sd. at
£2,400,000 ; this would give £960,000 for each penny of tax.
But a few sentences later in his speech, he had said that the
actual produce of the tax in 1858.59 at sd. was £6,140,000.
That would make each penny to produce £1,258,000. He
gave a third and different statement when estimating what
would be the receipt from the three quarters of the tax
which he proposed to collect in the ensuing financial year ;
this he estimated at £8,472,000, and the fourth quarter at
£2,250,000; giving an aggregate of 10,722,000, or £1,072,200
for each penny. If the second calculation was correct, the
9d. tax proposed on a former evening would actually produce
a larger revenue than what the Chancellor of the Exchequer
now estimated from a 10d, tax. Another.point was the
mode in which he proposed to collect the three quarters
within the year. There would tie considerable practical dif-
ficulty in this; and he should be glad to hoar some explana-
tion. He also hoped that some alteration would be made
in the remuneration allowed to the collectors. They were
extremely well paid, and as the tax was to be doubled, their
ought to be some reduction in their poundage.
Mr.. DEEDES expressed his disappointment at the finan
mai statement.
Mr. L. BLAKE •
expressed his conviction that the income
tax pressed unjustly on the commercial classes, as compared
Mr. LONalwhoEivir exempt up to £2OO a-year.
was to be levied in Irelansdeodn whether any augmented tax
mised by the Chancellor of the EexecZegausesressmieinetie asd
that

on the schedules B, C, and D, there had been an actual de-
crease of receipts between 1854 and 1857.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER referred
to the inconvenience of re-opening the question on partial
_ _

grounds, Sir H. Willoughby had complained that the pre-
sent arrangement of the income tax bore unjustly upon
those in schedule A. Another hon. member had opened
another source of complaint, one that was much more rife,

and much more serious and difficult to deal with whenever

the subject was fairly broached—its unequal pressure upon
*ichedUle D. The truth was that thegreat battle of the in-
come tax was between schedules A and D. The question of

remissions in favour'of the farmers under schedule B was

a very small one, the real question was between schedules

A and D. If the hon. baronet made the motion which he

promised; with a view to improve the terms for schedule A,
he would find other thembeis on his right and left up. in arms
for Schedules. D and E, aid he might be left to be dealt with

by these gentlemen. (A laugh.) There was no doubt
that the tax was full of inequalities ; but there would be
no advantage to any particular' interest in opening the
question of those inequalities, except at a time when the
house could give to the subject an attention bearing some
proportion to its extreme difficulty, its,vast importance, and
the immense financial and social dangers which, he hesi-

bated not to say, would infallibly attend any precipitate pro-

ceeding in regard to it. (Hear.) He was not afraid of any
such precipitate proceeding ; but ho thought it his duty
always to keep in view the extremely perilous and critical
nature of the whole question, which would, in fact, open

something like a soramble between class and class in this
country, and for the opening of which he did not wish to be
responsible, though he fully admitted the right of members
to give their attention to the subject and to bring it before
the house. If Sir H. Willoughby made the motion he pro-

posed, it would be convenient to both houses, with regard
to the progress of the public business, if he would make it

either that evening or on the report of the bill. What he
(the Chancpllor of the Exchequer) had said with respect to
assessment was intended entirely in favour of the tax-payers.
It had reference exclusively to schedule B ; and the object

was not to increase the burden on leaseholders. It had
been asked whether any relief could be given under sche-
dule Ato the tax levied on mines. He had not had any
recent application on that subject, but he should be happy,
either in or out of the house, to hear any statements which
might give an opportunity of adjusting the tax in propor-
tion to the receipts of the owners of mining property. In
speaking of the unfavourable result that might happen to
schedule A, from a general discussion of the subject, he was
quite aware that the matter was a grave one. He himself
had laboured in that house to show that the tax fell upon
schedule A much more heavily than was generally sup-
posed, as all house proprietors in particular were aware, for
on them it fell with a weight that was really extreme.
(Hear, hear.) He had been so distinctly charged by Sir J.
Pakington with breach of promise with regard to the in-
come tax, that ho must quote to the house the substance of
his statement in 1853. The right hon. baronet appeared to
think that he had promised that a certain course should be
pursued in 1860 irrespective of what might happen in the
meantime, and the demands of the public service. Had ho
made so rasha promise as that, it would have been the act of
an insane man to attempt to keep it. But he did not find, from
the authentic records of their proceedings, that he had been
guilty of such an excess of folly. He had said in 1853 —" I
think it also desirable that effective measures should be
taken to mark this tax as a temporary tax. My own opinion
is decidedly against the perpetuity of this tax as a perma-
nent ordinary portion of our revenue. But while I state
the wish of the Government to propose it as a temporary
tax, I do not ask you to rely upon their words as binding
either them or yourselves, irrespective of what may occur
in the interim, to put an end to the tax entirely in a given
year." The answer to those who said that stleh expecta-
tions ought to be fulfilled was to point to the increase of
fourteen millions in the expenditure of the country. How
far that was a sufficient answer he pretended not to say ;
but itlmerely showed how foolish it would have been in the
Government of the day to make such a pledge, or in the
Parliament to accept it, supposing they had done so. As to
the figures quoted by Sir John Pakington, he thought he
should be able to show that they were strictly accurate.
He was not aware that he had referred to the produce of
the tax in. 1858-59, or that he had stated it at £6,140,000.
But tin produce of the tax in that year, whatever it was,
did :tot represent the value of a sd. tax; it really repre-
sfmted the value of a 7d. tax for the first half-year, and a
sd. tax for the second half-year. He had stated, as was
truly said, that there was due of the present year's tax, in
respect of the law expiring en the 31st March, £2,400,000 ;
also that there would be obtained by collecting three-fourths
within the year, if the tax were voted by the house, a sum
of £8,472,000. He had likewise stated the sum which would
remain to be collected after the Ist April, 1861, at $2,250,000.
There was an apparent discrepancy, but no real one. All the
calculations were as accurate as could be made in the form
of estimates. The reason of the apparent discrepancy was
this, that the collection was not quite equally distributed.
In Scotland, for example, the whole annual tax under sche-
dules A and and he believed B also, was collected about
January. • That was one reason. It so happened that owing
to the lateness of the period at which, from other circum,
stances, the financial statenient of last year was made, the
July dividend, which ought to have paid an income-tax of
13d. in the pound, escaped with an income-tax of only sd.
That consequently deranges. the collection. Instead there-
fore of getting £9,000,000 within tthe year, they got
£8,472,000 within the year,and £2,250,000 beyond the year,
making £10,722,000. That was the cause of the apparent
discrepancy in the figures. With regard to the collection of
three quarters of the tax in lieu of one quarter within the
year, there was no alteration of the law. The collection was
not uniform as it now stood, it being paid in some cases
quarterly, in others half-yearly, and ence for all, as in the
case of Scotland. With regard to another point of consi-
derable importance which the right hon. gentleman touched
upon, namely, the per tentage on the collection of the tax,
there was only one change which they proposed to make,
and that was to take the assessment on the railways from
the head office of the railways, and transfer it to the head
office of the Government at Somerset-house. It was absurd,
for example, that because the head office of the North-
Western Railway, which had its revenue of so many mil-
lions, was in the parish of St. Pancras, the collector there
should have the per tentage on the whole amount of its in-
come tax, They proposed, therefore, to make this a matter
of direct arrangement between the Government and the
railway companies. And he felt no scruple in doing this,
because thepoundage afforded ample and adequate remune-
ration to the collectors. (Hear, hear.) The whole question
of the poundage on collection required revision, when the
House of Commons was in a position to vote the tax for a
term of years. (Hear, hear.) When the income tax was
at sd. in the pound, the poundage did not give adequate
remuneration for the trouble. Oa the other hand, when it
was 16d. the receipts were much larger than they ought to
have been. It was desirable, therefore, to adopt a better
balanced system. Another reason why he did not make a
proposal of this kind, and one which the right hon. gentle-
man would appreciate, was this, that in the present session
it would be the duty of the Government to propose a mea-
sure to Parliament bearing on the very important question
whether the assessed taxes should be continued to be col-
lected by local authorities or by officers directly responsible
to the Government. (Hear, hear.) He did not propose to
submit to Parliament any plan by which a general and corn.
pulsory change should be made in the present system ; but
there was so strong an expression in many quarters of a de-
sire to be freed from the responsibility of the collection of
these taxes, and to put them under the control of the Execu-
tive Government, that they thought it right to submit a
measure for the purpose of transferring the function to the
Executive Government. (Hear, hear.)
After a few words from Sir J. PAKINGTON in explana-

tion,

Mr. DISRAELI said he had already expressed his opi-
nion that the financial scheme of the right hon. gentleman
was improvident and unwise, and had an opportunity of
voting against the repeal of a particular tax—a portion of
that scheme—on a subsequent occasion. The house, how-
ever, approved of the general policy of the budget, and de-
cided in favour of the' repeal of that particular tax. This
being the case he did not think he would bo justified in voting
against the 10d. income tax. But he could not understand
the remarks of tho hon. member for. Kent (Mr. Deedes), who
voted in favour of the general financial policy of the govern-
ment, and he believed in favour of the repeal of•the tax on
paper, and now seemed alarmed at the dangerous financial
policy of the country. The hon. member for Kent was ready
with his warnings against the consequences of events which
he himself assisted in accomplishing. (Hear, hear.) They
were now called upon to vote an income tax of very great
amount, without any prospect, as far as he could judge, of a
speedy release from what he still believed was an unpopular
burden. (Hear, hear.) rho right hon. gentleman, not for the
first time, referred to what took place in 1853 in order to prove
that he entered into no compact with Parliament, or with the
country, that there should be an absolute abolition of the in-
come tax in 1860, when by an unfortunate coincidence the
right hon. gentleman was the Minister to make the proposition
foritscontinuance. Of course no one supposed that any
Minister could enter into an absolute tottilittt, or that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer Was to be held to the " letter
of his bond" apart from all financial considerations and the
circumstances of the country. But the right hon. gentleman
would not pretend to deny that the scope of his policy was
not—that in 1860 the termination of the 'mettle tax should
take plice. (Hear.) He could not deny—for he must feel—
that upon the expediency of that policy and the hope of its
realisation he enjoyed for seven year% the reputation which
that statesman-like scheme was calculated to altord. (lto.)
He could not forget that he particularly retorted to the Ter-
minable Annuities, on which he might calculate on
£2,000,000 or more as affording positive data for his caltula,
tions, and to show that his estimate ,wart not based upon
mere transient and illusory speculation. (Hear.) What he
complained of now was that the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, having all the credit of a policy which proved so frail
and fallacious, was the person who having power to appro-
priate these £2,000,000, had not appropriated them to the
relief of the country, but on the contrary, opened out new
schemes which; if it were improvident and unsafe at any
time, as he believed, were replete and rife with danger un-
der present circumstances. (Hear.) That was the cause of
the dissatisfaction in the public mind, and it was a point
which the Chancellor of the Exchequer always evaded when
he came to tbe consideration of the question. He could not