The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-22 00:00:00

seeess--
expenditure and increased responsibility ? Tea; "I'')
If you had thought proper to join in freeing Italy, if you
had been involved in the war, you could not, as men of
honour, as a community possessing self-respect, refuse to
attend a Congress which was to wend up the results of
your own energy and your own interference. But when,
by good fortune, as some say, or by sound policy, as I
maintain, your councils have saved you from that respon-
sibility, are you at the last moment, from some vain senti-
ment, from some ebullition of disappointed feeling, to be
entrapped into attending this Congress or Conference ;
and are you to enter into arrangements and engage-
ments which mu.st lead to increased expenditure and in-
creased peril to those finances which already required
there sverest criticism and the most careful administration
Thee is one point which influences our expenditure which it
sp to me is deserving of the best attention of the house.
Let us see if there be not one of possibly still greater import-
ance connected with these public transactions and the expen-
diture of our finances, and which, in my opinion, this house
would be wanting in its duty if it were to neglect. We have
this peace, such as we know of it ; but I maintain that inas-
much as it gives us peace,and a peace based upon the exist-
ing equilibrium of power, it is one that ought to be satisfac-
tory to Englishmen and to statesmen. I know there are per-
sons who are dissatisfied with it even in this country, and
certainly there are in other countries—honest and honourable
men undoubtedly, but who upon political affairs take an exag-
gerated view, and cannot agree that in transactions of this
kind men can be influenced by considerations of common
sense. I know some people are disa ...lilted. They expected
that the Emperor of the French, a ' .man Catholic Prince,
the first child of the Church, and exercising, though by the
consent and election of the French, nevertheless a despotic
sway, was about to establish in Italy the Protestant reli-
gion and the British Constitution. (Laughter.) You can-
not argue with such persons ; but there are other persrtheeons
also, in other countries, who are disappointed. Neve
less, in respect to this peace, as regards Englishmen, Eng-
land, and English interests, maintain that e arrange-
-
ment, as a whole, is entitled to our respect. The arrange
ment which gives us peace without the disturbance of the
political balance of power is one we ought to welcome? if
not with enthusiasm, at least with respect. I am told, in-
deed, that this peace is to be disapproved, and I have heard
that it is disapproved by English statesmen, because—
singular reason—the Emperor of the French has not real-
ised the programme with which he commenced the war. I
should like to know whoever realised on a peace the pro-
gramme wlth which he commenced war ? (Hear, hear.)
Compare the manifesto of any State or country—l care not
under what form of government—(you may throw the
United States of America into the bargain)—compare the
original manifesto on which war was declared, and the
avowed purpose for which it was waged, with the final paci-
fication, and I defy you to bring an instance in which the
objects were fully or in a great degree realised. Take the
late Russian war. (Hear, hear.) I heard the noble lord,
the present Prime Minister, announce that he was most dis-
appointed at the way in which it had terminated ; and did
he not send a special Minister to oppose the arrangements
which were proposed by some of his allies, but which he
stated to be in direct violation of the objects of the war?
You heard from the very moment that peace was entered
into, not only in England but almost in every other country,
lamentations that it was a war waged for a great purpose,
which was only partially accomplised. I do not blame the
peace made with Russia. I supported that peace, and I think
that it was wise to make peace with Russia. Certain ob•
jests of public benefit were attained ; and, that any rational
man or Minister of State would now impugn the conduct
of our ally because he has entered into a peace which does
not agree with his programme, is an unaccountable and
inconceivable weakness. (Hear, hear.) Between the mani-
festo which declares war and the signing of the articles of
eace a great many important events occur, and a great
deal happened between the manifesto of Milan and the
articles of the peace of Villafranca, which, no doubt, might
have modified the views of a successful conqueror or the
most determined invader ; and when taking a wise and mo-
derate view of affairs he enters into a peace, which I think
has the elements of being a permanent one, is he, therefore,
to be held up asap rince whom no one can trust, since he
has not done that which no potentate or State had done,—
realised the programme which he published before the war ?
(Hear.) On our conduct in this respect entirely depends
the financial position of this country. (Hear, hear.) I give
credit to the Prince who signed the peace for the motives
which induced him to sign it; and with respect to the
peace itself, I ground on it a hope and belief that it may be
permanent. (Hear, hear.) But let us do our best to make
it permanent. It is a peace favourable to the traditionary
policy of England, and it is our duty and interest to
cherish and maintain it. (Hear, hear.) We ought
not to encourage the malig.ners' who have not Eng-
lish interests or English traditionary policy to
maintain, to act against our interests, and destroy that
which the interests of humanity also require. (Hear, hear.)
Giving every prince and potentate credit for sincerity,oht
should be the course of the English Government ? What
is
the second point of policy which I pointed out to the House,
and which it is our duty at this moment earnestly to im-
press on the Government to follow? If we are to have
peace—if peace hasbeen signed by one of the greatest actors
in the war, on the ground that he shrank from the respon-
sibility of a general war—if these articles of Villafranca are
animated by a sincere spirit, as I believe they are, what is
the course for England to take ? Not to go to Conferences
and Congresses in fine dresses, with ribands and diamonds
and snuff-boxes (laughter), to enjoy the empty vanity of
settling the fate of petty princes (hear), but to go to your
great ally the Emperor of the French, give him credit far
the motives which animated and influenced him, and say to
him, " As you have terminated this war, and if you are in
favour of peace, now join with us in securing that peace by
the only mode by which peace can be secured—restore and
even increase the good feeling which once existed, and I
hope still exists, between the two countries of England and
France, by a diminution of your armaments." (Cheers.)
" If you are sincerely anxious, as we believe, for the peace
of Europe and the world, we will join you in a spirit of
reciprocal confidence, and by animating alike the industry
of both nations we will thus achieve conquests more valuable
than Lombardy or than those wild dreams of regeneration
promised but never realised." (Hear, hear.) At the pre-
sent moment this policy couldbe pursued with great advan-
tage, for the house will recollect that the late Government
were told that they could not boast of possessing the confi-
dence of the French Emperor. They were told that it was
entirely owing to the absence of some of those distin-
guished statesmen opposite from the Treasury bench that
Italy was involved in war. (Laughter.) If those
statesmen had been in office it was well known that the
Emperor of the French never could have taken a single
step without consulting them. (Laughter.) Now, then
there is a good opportunity for the noble lord opposite to
act a great part, and, instead of going to Conferences and
Congresses for petty objects, with respect to which England
has no interest, but which may involve England in great
disaster, let him prove to the world that England is a
Power that possesses and exercises great influence, espe-
cially with France, by accomplishing what is much more
important than mere formal articles of peace, by bringing
about that which will put an end for ever to doubts as to
the sincerity. of princes, which will speak to every cabin
and cottage in both England and France, as well as to the
two Houses of Parliament and places of high resort, and
prove to the national conviction of the great countries of
Europe that peace is the ;policy of their rulers. (Hear,
hear.) Let us terminate this disastrous system of warlike
expenditure. Let us mutually agree, with no hypocrisy
but in a manner which would admit of no doubt—by the
reduction a armaments—that peace is really our policy,
and then the Chancellor of the Exchequer may look for-
ward with no apprehensions to his next budget, and the
country may then actually expect the termination of the
income-tax. (Cheers.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
should, in reply to the right hon. gentleman, first address
himself to the matters which were immediately connected
with finance. He should dismiss from his consideration that
portion of the right hon. gentleman's speech which had re-
ference to retrospective finance. No imputation had been
cast on any of the proposals of the present Government, or
on the right hon. gentleman in any of the remarks with
which they were set forth. He would not attempt to fol-
low the right hon. gentleman through his figures, but when
he spoke of a surplus revenue. of a million and a half, it
was a surplus of a description altogether new to him.
The only surplus he was aware of worth discussion was a
surplus of income over expenditure ; but the surplus
spoken of by the right honourable gentleman dealt rathei
• with fancy finance, and was merely a surplus of actual
over estimated income. What ought to be considered
was, how the money was to be got, and what money
they would be obliged to spend. The right hon. gentleman
estimated his surplus at a million and a half ; it produced
only £BOO,OOO, or about half that. He had to thank the
right hon. gentleman for the spirit in which he had dis-
cussed his financial proposals ; and he was rejoiced to hear
him declare in terms so strong his objection as a general
rule to the having recourse to a loan in circumstances like
' the present. He trusted that view would receive the gene-
ral concurrence of the house. (Hear.) If he understood
the right hon. gentleman right, he admitted they ought to
proceed by raising new taxes, and considered that the in-
.• come tax ought to be a main source of the supply, but yet
. ,
reserved to himself the right of objecting to it, and almost
announced his intention of proposing a modification in what
he called the mode of levying it, but what the right hon.
gtantleman described as the mode of levying the tax in fact
involved the whole question whether they should borrow or
not. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman said it would be
unjust and impracticable to levy the whole of the tax in the
first half year. As to the impracticability, he asked the
house to have confidence in the able men at the head of the
revenue department, without whose assurance as to the
practicability of the measure he would never have proposed
it. None of the difficulties attending the collection of the
tax would be rendered insuperable by his proposal. As to
the injustice, the House of Commons had as much right to
!as the, country in respect of six months or seven, as of
7elv e, but that was not done ; people were merely called
toon
pay upon the first half year. The right hon. gentle-
;7o4n. oPrepoeed to omit the last two lines of the first Theresolu-
result of that would be to postpone the receipt
of the tax, and throw it over into the year 1860-61. If
that were done, of course money must be raised to fill the
gap, and to
form or moth: they would be obliged to borrow in one
dared, it was inconsistent
as the right hon. gentleman de-
to go to the money iistent with the honour of the country
so to go for two. n:noter for five millions, it was equally
increase the financial jected to do anything which would
man would wish burdenstoer on the year 1860. No pru-
dent esponsible for doing so. He had
not as yet had an opportunity
the view he was disposed to tais:fe stating fully to the house
financial
clear conviction as to the
increasing difficulties of the
try; it was too serious a matter to be position of this coin-
treated, or dis-
posed of in so summary a manner by the right hon. gentle-
. man i who declared he considered the progress of the ex-
penditure to be natural and legitimate, and
hTight to con-
gentleman.
thane. He could not agree with the right
In
d s were
(Hear.) It was true social wants and social
making new demands on the public purse.
up to 1853, the commencement of the Russian ware period
he
demands had been increasing, but, thanks to the thrift and
enconomy of public men, not to such an extent as much to
affect the expenditure, which was then about equal to what
it had been for ten or fifteen years before. The case was very
different since demands of every kind for every purpose
were admitted to such an extent that if the same course
was pursued for the next fire or ten years, it would bring
the finances of the country into a state of absolute confu-
sion—(hear)—and reduce the house to the necessity of im-
posing the most severe taxes in their highest degree, or hay.
mg recourse to borrowing to meet expenditure. He did not
mean to say the civil service expenditure couldtbe reduced
to tine limit of 183, but the house should recall the spirit of
wise economy which marked the first administration of the
puke of Wellington and the first reformed Parliament. He
would not refer to naval and military estimates, but he
would call the attention of the house to some instances to
:show wl eat the civil service estimates would come to unless
the house laid strong hands on them. A question had been
aeced Odd evening about harbours of refuge. The report on

that subject recommended a public expenditure of two mil-
lions and a half, and an advance of public money of a mil
lion and a quarter. Estimates of ,that sort always were so.
-Under this head alone they had an expenditure of five mil-
lions of public money and an advance of three millions.
Again, public offices required to be built—on what. scale ?
Would they be content with the same expenditure as on
that house ? (Hear.) They were to have a New National
Gallery ; they had purchased Burlington House, but
had not yet covered the site with buildings
worthy of the purpose for which they were in-
tended. He next came to their old friends the packet and
telegraph contracts. Those contracts amounted to a million,
of which £600,000 a-year was voted. The house was aware
that these contracts were entered into by the Government
and then submitted tothe house; when the present Govern-
ment came into office they found contracts pending to the
amount of £600,000. (Hear, hear.) He could not speak
with such calm satisfaction as the right hon. centime' of
the growth of the civil service estimates. (Hear, hear.) The
right hon. gentleman was also rather sanguine as to the
naval and military estimates. According to him nothing
was requisite but that the present Government should adopt
the views and follow the measures of the late Government
with regard to foreign policy, and all difficulties would
vanish, and the income-tax might be got rid of. He could
not agree in the broad assertionmade by the right hon. gen-
tleman or by the noble lord the member for Haddington-
shire as to the perfect wisdom of the measures adopted by
the late Government in the complication of Europe or their
perfect success. The right hon. gentleman said they had
been vindicated by him. He (the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer) would not attemptto followhim throughall the topics
he had touched. He had flown far too high for a mere jour-
neyman likea Chancellorof the Exchequer, and he thought
it would be better if some other occasion had been taken for
a discussion on that policy. (Hear, hear.) The right hon.
gentleman said he was glad to hear thenew Governmentin-
tended to walk in the footsteps of the old. As a humble
member of the new Government he had endeavoured to
make himself master of the papers connected with the acts
of the late Government, and he must say the perusal left on
his mind the clearest conviction that Lord Malmesburyhad
applied himself to his task in the spirit of an English gen-
tleman and a lover of peace ; but as to anything beyond
that, he must beg to be silent unless he was required to
discuss the matter fully. He hoped hon. gentlemen oppo-
• site would not try to compel their assent to sweeping as-
sertions, but would be content with the testimony they
had received from the noble lord the Secretary for
Foreign Affairs as to the aims and views of Lord Malmes-
bury, and not by continual vaulting leave them no alteri;ta-
five between the inviduous ask of dissection, or leaving it
to be supposed by their silence that they approved of all
that had been done. The right hon. gentleman had en-
deavoured to impress strongly on the Government the
necessity of reviving, or, he hoped he might say, of preserv-
ing the alliance which has so long prevailed between this
country and France ; and of acting on that line which has
become a law of the foreign policy of this country. The
right hon. gentleman told them to require a diminution of
armaments. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) believed
he did not go beyond his duty in declaring the sentiments
of his colleagues, that as soon as ever the state of Europe
would admit of applying that wholesome and salutary test
to those pacific intentions, that moment it would be the
duty of the English Government to apply it. The right
hon. gentleman said they would betray their duty, if they
were accomplices in any congress—he made no exception as
to the object of it—but gave a sweeping solemn denuncia-
tion of all congresses. Yet four or five months ago Lord
Malmesbury had no rest day or night, sending despatches,
recommending, enforcing, organising adjusting, seeking by
hook or by crook to bring about a congress. licswould not
follow the right hon. gentleman into the discussion of the
peace; he hoped and believed the peace would be lasting,
but he must reserve his judgment. (Hear.) The right
hon. gentleman said fault was found with the peace because
it did not fulfil the programme with which the war was
commenced, but said no peace had ever done so. That view
of history was new to him. (Hear.) The, right hon. gen-
tleman said the Russian war did not fulfil its programme.
(Hear, hear.) If the programme was to be found in the
heated tab,da of some men, no doubt the peace did not
fulfil it ; but if the programmes were to be drawn from
the manifestoes of Sovereigns, the treaty of Paris more
than accomplished every object put forth by the Sove-
reign of England in her manifesto, and much more. (Hear.)
There was nothing in that manifesto about the destruction
of the fortress and arsenal of Sebastopol ; nothing
of a prohibition of a Russian fleet in the Black
Sea; nothing of a cession of territory by Russia to the
Danubian Principalities ; yet all these were accomplished
by the war of 1856. (Hear, hear.) Did not the great re-
volutionary war fulfil its programme ? Some of them set
out with a purpose to restore the Bourbons. Mr. Pa
ten ever
went so far ; he only wanted security against Fran. Yet
iqk not only obtained that security, but the Bourbons were
restored, and that in the manner most flattering to the na-
tion—by the presence of a foreign army. He did not share
the right hon. gentleman's views as to the congress. As to
the preservation of peace, there was one point which he must
urge on the house and on all classes—the duty of preserving
the greatest moderation in word as well as in deed. (Hear.)
It was the duty of the Government to strive to make peace
permanent in Europe. In that object he hoped they would
have the cordial and hearty co-operation of the right hon.
gentleman; but her Majesty's advisers must claim for
themselves, with regard to the measures they should adopt,
perfect liberty to form their conscientious judgment, when
they were in possession of greater lights and more extended
knowledge than the circumstances of the present day
afforded them.
Mr. BRIGHT was not sorry to have had an opportunity
of hearing the right hon. gentleman before he himself ad-
dressed the house. There was much in the speech of the
right hon. gentleman and that of his predecessor which gave
him very great satisfaction. He must congratulate the right
hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli) in having become a
convert to the views so often expressed by himself and his
hon. friend the member for Rochdale. (Hear, hear.) The
late Sir R. Peel was once taunted with having become a
convert, and any man of intelligence and genius who led the
party opposite (none other could lead them) must every day
tend more to the course of foreign policy he had felt it his
duty to propound. The speeches of the right hon. gentle-
man and of the Chancellor of the Exchequer were divided
into two subjects—first, the question of the budget, then
that of the foreign policy. He would venture to make a
few observations in the same order. The budget of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had been received with as
much satisfaction as could fall to the lot of
such an unpleasant proposal. His approbation of it arose
principally from the fac t that its arrangements were proposed
to last 'for a Year only. (Hear.) The right hon. gentle-
man said that next year it would be necessary to take a
general and comprehensive view of the whole question of
finance and taxation. Notwithstanding all the Chancellor
of the Exchequer said of the ad vantages of the income tax,
it was a tax hateful to the people, and hateful because it
was felt to be unjust. He need not go into the question, but
that the same tax should be levied on fixed and precarious
incomes was felt by everybody to be a fixed injustice and a
fixed wrong. (Hear.) As long as that rule was maintained
he would never consent to have the tax made permanent.
As it was now, however, taken for one year only to meet an
emergency, he should not oppose it. He would be prepared
when the time came to show that the tax pressed with
double inequality on capital invested in trade or manufac-
tures as compared with capital invested in the cultivation of
land. What would hon. gentlemen say to the fact that far-
mers in England were charged income tax on an assessment
based on half the rent, but in Scotland on only a third of the
rent ? The expenditure had grown from 50 to 70 millions.
There was no reason why it should not rise to 100 millions
if a different course was not adopted. In dealing with the
subject of taxes, he would take the succession duties of
every kind, probate or legacy duties, and succession duties
under the act of 1853, as strictly property taxes. They were
calculated, they were imposed on the property left by a man
at his decease. They did not affect that unfortunately too
large class who had nothing to leave behind them, but they
affected anybody who succeeded to any property. The pro-
bate duty was a tax which fell only on personal property,
and not on land or real property. If the subject came
before the house next year he would bring this subject
before them, and urge them to remove this standing com-
plaint. The probate duty produced a large revenue, and
the return obtained on the motion of the hon. member for
Lambeth, who had so often called attention to this subject,
and so often attempted to remove the injustice, showed how
heavy a burden it was on personal property. In 1853, when
the Chancellor of the Exchequer introduced the Succession
Duty Act, he referred to this subject, and it was believed
he would have remedied the injustice • but nothing had
been done, and since then £1,328,300 had been annually
raised from personal property exclusively. In 1856 people
said there never was such a Chancellor of the Exchequer,
and then they spoke with wonder of the feat he had per-
formed in passing the Succession Duties Act, by which
landed property had for the first time been made liable to
legacy duty. But what did the right hon. gentleman cal-
culate would be the produce of that tax ? He said that in
1854 he expected it would yield £500,000. In 1855 he
thought it would produce £700,000 additional. In 1856,
£400,000 additional; while in 1857 and the following years
he looked forward to its yielding 2 millions per annum. By
the present time, therefore, they ought to have received
from it no less a sum than£9,3oo,ooo. But what had beexi
the actual result ? He would not give the actual figures,
because the Board of Inland Revenue told him they could
not separate with accuracy what they had received from the
succession duty, and what they had received from the old
legacy duty. But he would adopt a mode of calculation
which the right hon. gentleman had himself employed the
other night. The bid-legacy duty used to yield £1,380,000
a year, whereas the legacy and the succession duty together
yielded last year a sum of £2,211,000. That would show an
apparent increase of £831,000 a year. But even from that
they ought to deduct a certain sum for the natural increase
of the legacy duty, and also for a class of property which
used to pay legacy duty, but which the right hon. gentle
man, under the name of rateable. property, had transferred
to the succession duty, which it paid at a lower rate. The
amount paid by this rateable property he had no means
of computing ; and he would only deduct £50,000 on account
of the legitimate increase of the legacy duty. The result
would then be that instead of £2,000,000 the right hon. gen-
tleman's new tax only yielded £781,000 a-year. How cane
that ? The fact was, it was not what it pretended to be.
It was not a tax upon a fair valuation of each property as it
passed from one party to another. It attempted, mdeed, to
cure one great inequality; but in so doing it established
another almost as great and almost as offensive. He did not
blame the right hon. gentleman for that. The measure was
perhaps all that it was possible for him to carry ; but he did
blame him for want of acuteness in estimating at £2,000,000
a-year a tax which only yielded £781,000. (Hear, hear.)
He (Mr. Bright) would illustrate the operation of the law
by the case of a man who left £20,000, half of which was in
land, and the other half in stock, machinery, or other pro-
perty. He would suppose that this man left his property
to a stranger in blood. Now how would theßoard of Inland
Revenue deal with the land ? They would refer to certain
tables in order to ascertain what was the probable value of
the legatee's life ; they would then multiply the annual value
of the property by the number of years they found he had to
live, and charge-him succ.ession duty in the product. He
(Mr. Bright) had himself been so fortunate as to have a
small property left . him by a person of whom he had no
knowledge, and whom he had never seen. (A laugh.) He
was, of course, too grateful to be discontented that it was not
more. It had belonged to a persoa who was a great friend
-of peace, and who disc proved of the Russian war. His hon.
ill end (Mr. Pobden) and he had b3en the strongest opponents
o_fatyhaet_war, 'and therefore this gentleman left it to them by
wwasf making them some compensation. (Laughter.) It
having
worth about .E 1 500 -• , ,in fact, he remembered selling it
for £1,500 or
£5O to pay instead of
£1,450; and very much astonished he was at
to pay see a sum for succession duty. His age
was taken, the calculation was made, and he had £4O or
mended had the propertythe £l4O which would have been de-
hear.) He would take another been money in the funds. (Hear,
side
of etrhecase. An honourable mem-
ber who sat on that a
gentleman
had had a property
worth £32,000 left him by who was not a blood
relation. The hon. member was nmota':.
in fact below the average age of membenrseelilt man; he was
hat house; but
he would only be called on to pay £7OO. (Hear, hear.) Was

it consistent with fairness, with their personal honour, or
with their public duty, to pass a law under which a class of
property the most solid, the most durable, that attracted to
it the best social and political advadtages, and that was
most susceptible of improvement, was it right to charge
such a property £7OO, whereas if it had been of another and
a far more fleeting character, it would have been charged
£3,200. (Cheers.) He should object to any permanent re-
tention of the income tax until the whole taxation of the

country was placed on a more satisfactory and honest foot-
ing. (Hear.) But the whole question was part of a larger
and a more serious one : the growing and frightful expendi-
ture of the country. (Cheers.) The Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer said that up to 1853therehad been no great increase
for many years past. In 1853 the whole expenditure in the
estimates of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) was
only £50,782,000; whereas it was now £69,207,000. (Hear,
hear.) It was only fair to say that the present estimates
were charged with an expenditure which formerly did
not come into them—a sum, namely, of £4,740,000 for
the collection of the revenue. But even after making that
allowance, the public expenditure had positively increased
by no less an amount than £13,685,000 a year. (Cheers.)
There could be no doubt that the most serious item of the
increase was on account of our armaments, the charge for
which had risen from £17,000,000 to £26,000,000. (Hear,
hear.) Now, he should like to ask the house a few serious
questions on this state of things. Did thehouse, forinstance,
believe that we were more or were less safe now than we
were in 1853 withregard to foreign war, and particularly with
regard to the invasion of the country? He Imewthatwehad
men amongst us who were afflicted with periodical panic.
(" Hear," and a laugh.) There was no complaint so in-
curable as that ; and each fit seemed so to weaken the con-
stitution of the patient that each became more ' and
more alarming than the last. (Laughter.) Then we had
newspapers. (Hear, hear.) We had one in this City con-
nected with a particular trading interest, which, from day
to day, from week to week, and from month to month—he
knew not at whose instigation, or whether at anybody's in-
stigation, poured out most foolish, but at the same time
most bitter invectives against the Emperor of the French,
and by that means against the French nation. (Cheers.)
Whether we approved of such a Government as there was in
France or not, it was clear that if we had such a Govern-
ment, and if we had foreign neighbours who were constantly
insulting that Government, depend upon it we should take
a great portion of those insults to ourselves. (Cheers.) Take
another paper, the Times, which moat unfortunately, but
most untruly, was believed abroad to represent the opinions
of the English nation. (Cheers.) Day by day, every form
which the English language could express was used by that
paper for the purpose of stirring up animosity between the
two greatest nations on the face of the earth. (Cheers.) And
yet in that very paper they had published letters which told
of aeres of bleeding and mangled human bodies over which
cavalry had galloped, till universal human nature shuddered
at the tale. If this sort of thing went on, nothing could pre-
vent our being embroiled in war with France. (Cheers.)
But these doctrines were not confined to the newspapers. If
they went into another, and what was commonly supposed
to be a higher place, they would find some aged peer deli-
vering a speech which might be somewhat in character with
the barbarism of 60 years ago, but utterly unfit for the times
in which we lived. No intelligent man in Europe reading
speeches of that character, whether made in that house or
in another place, could fail come to the conclusion—false,
utterly false, as in his conscience he believed it would be—
that there was in England a number of men, representing
a large amount of public opinion, who had tterly forgot-
ten the disasters and ruin of that great revolutionary war
to which the right hon. gentleman had referred,. and were
ready to enter into another war equally costly in treasure
and in soldiers, and with a result equally hopeless to Eng-
land or to Europe. (Cheers.) There could be no peace be-
tween Austria and France that would not be infinitely pre-
ferable to the evils of the war which had just concluded.
When he heard of the peace he felt quite relieved io think
that the species to which he belonged was no longer engaged
in so fiend-like a destruction of human life. The Emperor
of the French had made a most valuable admission in that
most remarkable speech which he had just pronounced. He
said he had discovered that he was making ;war "against
the mind of Europe." (Hear.) He (Mr. Bright) only wished
that he had made that discovery three months sooner.
(Cheers.) Again, the Emperor said that he had discovered
the war was assuming dimensions that were inconsistent
with the interests of France. He (Mr. Bright) confessed
that he was surprised that the Emperor had not found out
from the first that there would be a danger of such a result
taking place ; but these two admissions proved to him (the
hon. member) that the suspicions which had been so sedu-
lously inculcated in this country against the Emperor of the
French were altogether unfounded. (Hear.) He did not be-
lieve that the Emperor was at all anxious to enter upon a
war with a nation strong in the poasession of 30 millions of
united people—the most powerful, the most rich, and, all
things considered, the most satisfied with their government
of any in Europe. (Loud cheers.) War was not the thing it
used to be. There was a time when soldiers despised the
makers of machines. There were in those days no garters,
stars, or baubles to decorate men who made steam engines,
or manufacturing tools. But what had war now become ? It
was no longer a question of personal prowess, or strength
of body, or nerve, or quickness of eye. It had become a
mere mechanical slaughter, and it would go on becoming
every day more costly and more savage, until it broke down
by its own weight, or until some government—he hoped it
would be ours—suggested a general reduction of armaments.
(Cheers.) Our foreign policy had hitherto been to be
perpetually meddling. We never wished to annex any
portion of European territory, but we maintained great
armaments, so that when anything happened we might
negotiate, intervene, advise, or do something or other
with what was called " an effect equal to the magnitude
and dignity of this country." (Laughter and cheers.)
Well, that was exactly what the French did. (Hear, hear.)
We built large fleets, then they built large fleets ; then we
built larger, and so the thing went on. We had no right to
blame them, nor had they to blame us. We were both very
silly, and it was believed in France that all the stir we were
making about the national defences was merely to coverthe
preparations we were making to invade France. (Laughter.)
He had that day read a letter in which it was stated that all
the-coast between Dunkirk and another point was fortified
and secure against any attempt to land an English army.
Just before the Russian war broke out, the French wished
to draw back, but we were not willing, and they stuck to
the original proposal, simply from an anxiety to imitate the
foreign policy of England. Subsequently we went to war
with a more distant country—China—and again the French
joined with us. In a word, the foreign policy of the Emperor
might be described as an anxiety toimitate our own. (Hear.)
With respect to the proposed conference, he thought that if
we were merely to put our name to documents that were of
no advantage to Italy or to ourselves, we had better have
nothing to do with it. (Hear, hear.) The 36 millions of
Frenchmen wh 3 were. quietly engaged in their own industries
were as anxious for perpetual peace with England as any
English Christian could be for perpetual peace with France.
He believed that the Emperor was no less anxious for
peace, and he had no doubt that persons in France were
utterly annoyed at the course taken by certain English
newspapers. (Hear.) He trusted that her Majesty's Go-
vernment would throw away those old, ragged, worthless,
bloody traditions, which filled the waggon loads of old
papers that were to be found in the cellars of the Foreign-
office. Let us approach the subjeCt like sensible Christian
men. Let us tell him that the trade between the two coun-
tries was nothing like what it ought to be. Let us offer to
remove the heavy duties which we had placed upon the
greatest produce of France, her light wines. (Hear, hear.)
It might be said that this would involve a loss to the re-
venue of £1,200,000 ; but what were one or two millions a
year in a question like this ? It would strengthen the
Emperor against the only people he could not keep down,
the monopolists and the protectionists of France ; for if he
were enabled to say to them, " I offer you as customers
thirty millions of the richest people in the world," it would
give him an irresistible power to make changes in the tariff
of France, which would be as beneficial to us as to our
neighbours. (Hear, hear.) He would be enabled to lock
together two nations, so that statesman nor monarch would
never again be able to throw the brand of discord between
them. We should then be able to ask him why he squan-
dered away millions of his treasure in increasing his arma-
ments, merely to compel us to squander millions of our
treasure to keep pace with him. He believed that if these
considerations were honestly and frankly made they would
be successful. (Hear, hear.) He was aware there were
two or three men in that house who would say that these
things were as the idle wind. But let them recollect
that we were paying £30,000,000 a year for interest on
the debts incurred in former wars; and that that added
to the cost of our present armaments at home and in
India, made up no less a sum than 76 millions a year.
The tone assumed by the right hon. gentleman (Mr.
Disraeli) and by the Chancellor of the Exchequer was one
that would find a response in the hearts of millions of people
in this country. He had never flattered the noble viscount ;
but be did not think it was possible there could ever be a
minister who could more effectually press upon the Govern-
ment of France the views he (Mr. Bright) had been ex-
pressing. (Cheers.) It was not for the sake of those who
lived in great houses or that sat in legislative halls that he
made these remarks, but it was for the sake of those thou-
sands of persons in this country for whom a state little above
pauperism was the lot which awaited them from the cradle
to the grave. (Hear, hear.) It was because his heart sor-
rowed beyond what language could express at the suffering
which might follow from the foreign policy of the Govern-
ment that he prayed there might come soon some statesman
who should take the steps which he had indicated, who
should cement these two great nations for the future, who
should show that 1,800 years of Christian profession was at
last to be accompanied by something like Christian practice.
(The hon. gentleman resumed his seat amidst loud cheering,
again and again repeated.)
Lord J. RUSSELL rose in consequence of what had
fallen from his hon. friend the member for Birmingham, to
say that he quite concurred with much which had fallen
from him. He must say that he had seen with pain the at-
tempts which had been made to induce a feeling in this
country against the sovereign, and he must add, against the
people of France—(hear, hear)—attempts which could only
produce amongst the French nation a feeling of animosity
against the people of this country. He believed, on looking
back to wars between great nations, that they had occurred
less because there was any cause for dispute than because
there had been some feeling of animosity between the na-
tions. A feeling which had roused all the pride which be-
longed to a great nation had often made a most trifling
cause, a cause which a few weeks of diplomacy might re-
move, a source of calamitous war. It was, therefore, that
he felt with his hon. friend that there was something dan-
gerous, not in the present disposition of the Emperor of
the French, not in the present disposition of the people of
;hat country, but in the constant attempts which were
being made to excite a feeling of jealousy with re-
gard to some deep plan which was being made against our
peace and security. (Hear, hear.) Now he believed, with
his hon. friend, that whatever reproach might be addressed
to the Emperor of the French on the various questions of
hie foreign and domestic polity, he had been as regarded
this country a faithful ally to us on trying and great occa-
sions. And he believed likewise that as each question
arose it was his wish to obtain the concurrence and appro-
bation of the people of this country. (Hear.) He believed
that he estimated the good sense and intelligence, of the
people of this country ; he estimated duly our power, and
set great value on the feelings we entertained. These being
his views with regard to the Emperor of the French, it was
another question what we were to do with regard to the
armaments to which his hon. friend had referred. He re-
collected 11 years ago, in the reign of Louis Philippe, who
was the most peaceoble of the sovereigns of France, he called
the attention of the house to the changes which had taken
place in the means of war, and reminding them that with
existing means of crossing the sea we could no longer rely
on our position alone. In so saying he meant no offence to
Louis Philippe,P and in saying the same thing now he meant
no offence to the Empercr of the French. He only said
this—that we must bear in mind that we were one of the
great nations of Europe, and that we must act in a way
worthy of our position. He would net say whether it would
be wise or not in this country even to form one ef a congress
on the affairs of Europe—that was a matter which had yet
to be decided upon. As his hon. friend said, this country
ought not to be a prty to any congress for the mere purpose

of negotiating a scheme to which it had never given any
assent. Such a course it would not be proper for us to
take. But if there was in any country a feeling of dissatis-
faction and alarm, and a feeling existed that the presence
of England would make a peace more solid and satisfac-
tory, then it would not be unbecoming in this country
to interfere with the other powers of Europe to pro-
mote a satisfactory arrangement. His hon. friend had
said that we ought to make some arrangement with France
with resp ect to diminishing the duties upon French produce.
He (Lord' J. Russell) believed that so far as the Emperor of
the French was concerned, be would be willing to diminish
the protei ;five duties, which he (Lord J. Russell) believed
did more injury to the people of France than they did to
any other poster of Europe. But he thought it would be a
dangerous and useless thing to enter into a discussion upon
that subjee,t. They might an so doing induce that party
which, thoikgh weak and almost no longer existing in Eng-
land, was aft ong and powerful in Franee—the
urgeprotection-
ivsotus—rintogtoynfoiernotuhra to
own
ne werebenefit. a
He
rl
remembered when this matter was brought before Sir R.
Peel, who was at first inclined to think that diplomacy
in
injure
en their their
industryeminti.
might interfere, but he ultimately gave it as his opinion
that we ought to take that course which we believed woad
be most advantageous to ourselves, and let other countries
follow us when they were convinced of the policy of the
step we had taken. He should, therefore, be sorry to make
this a matter of diplomatic intercourse ; the more so as he
believed the Emperor of the French would, as far as he
could, promote the views which were in accordance withthe
policy which we believed to be the true one. He trusted
that neither that which was passing from day to day, nor
that which had passed in another place, would awaken feel-
ings of jealousy in any foreign power, but that the Govern-
ment might always be able to point to the representatives
of the people in that house as in favour of the maintenance
of peace throughout the world. (Hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON did not wish to prolong the dis-
cussion, but he could not remain silent without noticing
what had fallen from the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr.
Disraeli), the more especially as it had already been more
than once stated in that house. The right hon. gentleman
repeated that which had been stated the other night by the
late Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, viz. that he (Lord
Palmerston) had said that the present ministry had nothing
to debut to follow the policy of their predecessors with regard
to foreign affairs. Now, he said no such thing. That which
he had stated was that, so far as the question. of neutrality—
so far as the mere entry of England into the hostilitieswhich
were now going on was concerned, the Government were
determined to follow the course of their predecessors. But
so far from from giving them an unmitigated approval, he
had expressly condemned the manner in which the late
Government had conducted their foreign policy, on account
of the leaning which they had exhibited towards Austria
and against France, and the insinuations which they had
thrown out more than once that England might be forced
into the contest, and that if she were so, it would not be on
the side of the allied powers of Sardinia and France. In his
opinitin the foreign policy of the late Government was in
this respect faulty, and that was his opinion still. He had
no doubt that the Government acted with the best inten-
tions, that they had acted in accordance with what they
thought right to the best of their ability. But it could not
be denied that the language of the late Government was,
upon all occasions, that of encouragement to Austria, and of
defiance to France. The meaning was in truth this—that
in the event of England being drawn into the war, an event
not improbable, the Government would take the side of
Austria. Now he believed that had the Government taken
the opposite course, had they intimated a leaning adverse to
Austria, the actual breaking out of hostilities might have
been avoided. He (Lord Palmerston) felt constrained to
say this much, for the right hon. gentleman opposite had so
often come down to the house with flourishes of drums and
trumpets on this subject, that it was incumbent on him to
place with clearness before the house what were the views
of the present advisers of the Crown. The right hon. gentle-
man deprecated most strongly that England should be a
party to any congress. That, as his noble friend intimated,
was a matter yet subject to consideration. But when the
right hen. gentleman expressed himself so earnestly against
a congress, he (Lord Palmerston) could not help re,ccollect-
ting that the late Government had once proposed and as-
sented to the meeting of a congress. The right hon. gentle
man said, "Don't go into a congress, or you will be involved
with obligations which will be most embarrassing here-
after." But for what object was the congress to which the
right hon. gentleman when in office had given his assent to
be assembled, if it was not to be assembled for the settle-
ment of the affairs of Italy by engagements binding all Go-
vernments ? And the house had been told that wars did not
accomplish the objects for which they were instituted. His
right hon. friend had answered that argument, for he had
pointed out that in the late Russian war this country had
obtained advantages even greater than it had hoped to gain
when it first went into that contest. And when it was said,
as it had been by the hon. member for Birmingham, that
England had induced France to go into that war, it was
only right to point out that the dispute first arose through
the conduct of France.
Mr. BRIGHT explained. He did not say that England
brought France into the Russian war. What he said was,
that when France would have accepted the Russian terms,
England Induced her to go on with the war, because she did
not wish it to be said that she had gone from her position
as ally of England.
Lord PALMERSTON would call the attention of the
house to other instances in which we had interposed in
foreign affairs, and our interposition had not been fruitless.
We had interposed in the matter of the kingdom of Greece,
and although the position of that country might not be
all that was desired—(hear; hear)—still po one could deny
that her situation was greatly improved from what it had
been before we interposed. Again, we had interposed in
the affairs of Belgium. The result was that the people of
that country were well governed, as prosperous, as attached
to their country, as it was possible for a people to be. We
had interposed, too, in the affairs of Spain, at a time when
the Government of that country was a despotism chequered
by constant revolutions. Spain now enjoyed the blessings
of a liberal constitution and a parliamentary Government.
So, too, in Portugal, our interposition had been followed
by the institution of a parliamentary Government not dis-
similar to Qur own. Again, in the case of the slave trade
we had secured freedom and happiness to millions of
Africans. It was not enough, on an abstract principle, to
condemn the practice of intervention ; it ought to be consi-
dered what the result was, and if that was satisfactory then
they ought to give their consent to the intervention. The
right hon. gentleman made a very eloquent discourse on
the horrors of war ; everybody must agree with him in that.
But it should be remembered that there were also calamities
during peace, and those who passed by the calamities which
Italy had suffered during the period of peace which preceded
the late hostilities showed in so doing that they had but a
limited acquaintance with the important bearings of the
subject they were discussing. He hoped that the peace
which was just concluded would not carry with it a repeti-
tion of those calamities. His noble friend had intended, as
was the fact, that whether this country would be repre-
sented at a congress or not was yet a subject of considera-
tion, but he might say that no Government would recom-
mend that England .should be a party to a conference merely
to register arrangements made by allies without her previous
consideration. He quite concurred with what had fallen
from his hon. friend the member for Birmingham, that
this country had no right to make itself a censor of the
manner in which any foreign sovereign might govern a
foreign.countiy so long as that country was content with
his government. All that this country had to do was to
remember that the Emperor of the French had been,
whether in peace or in war, our faithful ally. But while
fully assenting to these views he thought thatthey afforded
no reason why we should not put ourselves in a state of
defence. A great country like this, which had so many in-
terests to defend, so much wealth to protect, had .no right
to repose on the mere security of the forbearance pf other
nations. And it was not one power only from which the
complications of public evil might arise. There was Russia,
with whom we had already been in collision, and might be
again. He knew that there'could be nothing more injurious
to our interests, more adverse to common sense, than to pro-
claim a weakness, and, at the same time, by every means in
our power to gall and excite the jealousy of the very person
in regard to whom we expressed our feeling that hostility
might arise. There was one other point to which he would
refer, in order to express his concurrence with the view of
his noble friend, that we ought not to endeavour to enter
into any diplomatic engagement with France in order to in-
duce that country to enter upon the policy of free trade. No
doubt our so doing would only be to lead a strong party
there to raise an outcry that we were obtaining some
imaginary advantage over their industrial interests. To a
certain extent it might perhaps be urged that this country,
having the benefit of free trade, was a gainer by the reten-
tion of the opposite system in France. But the fact no
doubt was that nothing which France could do for the
benefit of her trade—and the abrogation of protection would
be such a benefit—could act but as a benefit to every other
country in the world. He hoped that thetime would come
when France, seeing the advantage which a system of free
trade bestowed upon ourselves, would introduce that prin-
ciple in her own affairs. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT explained. He did not propose anything
in the shape of a treaty of commerce, but he had said that
what had lately taken place in France with regard to the
reduction of duties offered a favourable opportunity to our
Government to bring the subject of the extension of free
trade measures under the consideration of the French Go-
vernment. With regard to treaties of commerce, he enter.
Wiled the same opinions as the noble lord.
Mr. S. FITZGERALD said.that what had fallen from
the noble lord rendered a few remarks from him necessary.
( The noble lords (Russell and Palmerston) had seized this
opportunity for entering upon the question of our foreign
policy. But the other nighe, when Lord Elcho proposed
to bring on his motion, and the views of the late Govern-
ment might have been explained and justified, the Govern-
ment said that the discussion of foreign affairs would be
inconvenient to the public service. Now, however, when
it was impossible for the late advisers of the Crown to go
fully into the matter, these noble lords were themselves the
persods to go into the discussion of foreign affairs. The
noble lord had not only approved the neutrality policy of
the late Government, but enforced it in nearly the same
language. The speeches of the noble lords must have con-
vinced everyone that they had made up their minds to go
into Congress—if they could get there. (Opposition cheers.)
They might say that the matter was still in doubt, but
their intention was evident. Either we should go into
Congress to accept the terms of peace or to alter them. If
to alter them, in whose interest? (Hear.) The noble lord
had expressed his desire to see Austria driven out of Italy.
If he went to congress to support this view, there was an
end of the neutrality of this country. Assuming it to be
true, as the noble lord said, that good had resulted from our
former interferences, that was not sufficient to justify us in
adopting any other than a strictly independent English
policy. Our interference at Naples had done much injury ;
the withdrawal of our ambassador had operated seriously in.
the Cagliari affair. Other instances of impolitic interfer-
ence were found in the Pacifico affair, and when Lord
Minto went through Italy stirring up all the populations to
revolt. On another occasion the noble lord (Palmerston)
had interfered in the affairs of Italy in such a way as to
prevent an arrangement which would have been far more
beneficial to that country than the one that had now been
arrived at, after ten years of suffering on the part of the
people. {Hear, hear.) He hoped that the Government
would shortly allow the house an opportunity for discussing
the propriety of going into congress. It would be the worst
course the Government could take to accept the bases of a
peace with which we had nothing to do. (Hear, hear.) Any
attempt to alter these bases in favour of Italy would be at-
tended with the worst effects, by estranging from us the other
powers ; and should the Government take such a course
they Would incur a very heavy responsibility which would
be visited upon them when Parliament again met.
Sir H. VERNEY said it would be impossible for this
country to refrain from exercising some influence on one
side or the other, in an important crisis like the present.
Mr. WHITESIDE said it was melancholy to reflect
that, after ten years of suffering on the part of the Italian
people, and all the miseries of the late war, worse terms
had been secured than were offered to the noble viscount
(Palmerston) ten years ago, and by him rejected. (Hear,
hear.)
Colonel SYKES referred to the vast increase in every
derpartment of expenditure in the last 25 years. Since
1835, the military expenditure had increased 'from seven
millions to eleven millions, or 65 per cent. The expen-
diture on the navy had increased from four millions to

eleven millions and a half, or 198 per cent. The cost of the
miscellaneous serrices had_ increased from £182,000 to
£BOB,OOO, or 342 per cent. In the salaries of public depart-
ments, now £1,433,000, there had been an increase of 300
per cent. The per centage, of increase, under the head of
law and justice, was still greater, no less than 414 per cent.
The expenses for education, science, and art, had risen from
£125,190 to £1,328,453. This was the progress of civilise,.
tion. (A laugh.)

Mr. E. LEATHAM objected to the proposal of the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer for making cheques presented by
the drawers liable to the penny stamp.
Mr. HORSFALL expressed his belief that the house
would readily grant any sum that was necessary for our na-
tional defences, but he thought that a less oppressive means
of raising the money might have been devised than by in-
creasing the income-tax, especially on persons of small in-
comes,

The house then went into committee.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
Willa not proceed with the alteration of the duty on cheques
until ample time wee given the public for consideration. He
would not introduce any bill on the subject this year, feel-
ing that it would be in the nature of a surprise. (Hear.)
He would now simply move the first resolution, which was
as follows :

That, towards raising the supply granted to her Majesty,
in addition to the rates and duties granted and now charge -
able under the act passed in the 16th and 17th years of her Ma-
jesty's reign, chapter 34, for granting to her Majesty duties
on profits arising from property, professions, trades, and
offices, there shall be charged, collected, and. paid, for and in
respect of all property, profits, and gains, charged or charge-
able under the said act, either by assessment, contract of
composition, or otherwise, the folio wing additional rates and
duties, that is to say—upon any assessment made on the an-
nual value or amount of any property, profits, or gainsex-
cept ppperty„ profits, and gains chargeable under Schedule

(B) Of tlie staeAct), the additional rate or duty of four pence
for every twenty shillings of the annual value or amount of
all such property, profits, and gains, respectively ; and for
and in respect of the occupation of lands, tenements, here-
ditaments, and heritages, chargeable under Schedule (B) of
the said act, the additional rate or duty of two pence in Eng-
land, and of one penny halfpenny in Scotland and Ireland
respectively, for every twenty shillings of the annual value
thereof, and such additional rates and duties respectively
shall be collected and paid with and over and above the first
moiety of the duties assessed or charged under the said act.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY moved as an amendment that
the income-tax should be augmented by 3d. only, instead of
4d. The tax was an odious and iniquitous one, and could
never be made just. At" the time of the first income-tax
every house of business in London petitioned against it, and
a member of that house recommended that the InCome Tax
Act should be burnt by the public hanz7man. (A laugh.)
He not only objected to the proposed increase of 4d., but
he objected to the whole of the 4d. being levied in the
first half year. Did the Chancellor of the Exchequer
propose to take, in October, the whole 4d. on the
Long Annuities, which expired in March following ?
He was not at all satisfied that it was necessary to raise
£4,000,900 of money, and therefore he moved that 3d. be
substituted for 4d.
Mr. POLLARD URQUHART thought the Chancellor
of the Exchequer had taken the best mode of meeting the
deficiency. He might have recourse to a loan or to an in-
crease of indirect taxation, but in an economical point of
view it was far preferable to tax income than capital.
Mr. SPOONER wished to know whether the right hon.
gentleman meant to deal with bankers' cheques in the pre-
sent year, and if so, what mode of proceeding he meant to
adopt ? He should also like to know whether, in the case
of a tenant occupying a farm the lease of which was to ex-
pire on Lady-day, the whole income tax would be levied
on that tenant, or whether the succeeding tenant was to
pay half the tax ?
Mr. W. WILLIAMS said he knew instances in which
great injustice had been done to working men by the opera-
tion of the income tax. He hoped a provision would be
introduced exempting the wages of labouring men from the
tax.

Mr. ROEB UCK would wish to know what difference
there was between the man who drove a quill and the man
who drove a dray ?
Sir S. NORTHCOTE could not agree with the amend-
ment of the hon. baronet, because he did not think they
would-be able to make both ends of the year meet if the
rate was to be reduced to 3d.
Mr. F. CR JSSLEY said although there might be some
difficulty with regard to the details of such a tax, he did not
believe it would be nearly so objectionable in principle as
the income tax. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUBBARD regretted that the only means which
the right hon. gentleman had discovered of extricating
himself from his financial difficulty was the aggravated use
of that most mischievous impost the unreformed property
and income tax. The course of our fiscal legislation had
led us more and more to the adoption of direct taxation,
and it was therefore necessary that that species of taxation
should be reformed, so as to make it as equitable as any
other tax that could be applied. Concurring in the spirit
of the motion of the hon. baronet (Sir H. Willoughby) he
should give it his cordial support. (Hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that,
although the discussion had- not been very long, it had
covered a considerable breadth of ground, and included a
variety of questions besides that which had been raised by
the hon. baronet. With regard to the question how the
Long Annuities were to be taxed, his answer was, that they
would be taxed in respect of a half-year's payment, like
other public securities which were payable half-yearly, the
tax being a tax for six months of the year. The quk slims
of the Long Annuities had often been considered, and the
difficulties which it involved were difficulties inherent in
the nature of the income tax. and it would only perplex the
case if he were to enter into the arguments of the hon. gen-
tleman who had just sat down. The hon. baronet proposed
to reduce the tax from 4d. to 3d., and upon this distinct
ground, that Chancellors of the Exchequer had got an in-
veterate habit of -underestimating the income of the country
—ergo. he had understated it, and consequently £1,000,000
might safely be put to his estimate, and £1,000,000 be thus
cut down from the ways and means. The hon. baronet
had omitted from his view of the case two very essential
particulars, which determined its whole merits. It was
not true, so far as he knew, that a praetice existed of un-
derestimating the income by the finance ministers of the
country. The estimates were framed mainly and almost
exclusively according to the deliberate judgment of the heads
of the revenue department. He never but once presenfed an
estimate that had not been framed in that manner, and. that
was the produce of the income tax on incomes under £l5O.
It was the practice to make the estimates with perfect-bona
fides, but it was impossible so to frame them as to anticipate
all the vicissitudes of the year. It was quite true that in
one case there had been an excess of £700,000 over the psti-
mate, and in another case an excess of £1,500,000. In
some cases however the revenue fell short of the estimate—
a remarkable instance of this occurred in 1840, when the
right hon. baronet the member for Portsmouth (Sir F.
Baring) was Chancellor of tne Exchequer ' • the revenue fell
short of his estimate two millions and a half ; he had at
times been much criticised for this, but in point of fact he
was not to blame, as the produce of the revenue depended on
the harvest, on peace, commercial prosperity, the crop of
sugar or tea. The heads of departments stated the estimates
as high as they consistently could, and that being so the
house would act most unwisely if it departed from the esta-
blished practice of keeping on the safe side. Since his ac-
cession to office he had requested the heads of the customs
and excise to reconsider their estimates, and the result had
been a small addition under each head. It should be recol-
lected also that the expenditure sometimes exceeded the es-
timate. Last year the actual increase exceeded the estimate
by a million and a half; but in consequence of an excess of
expenditure, the actual surplus was only £BOO,OOO, which
had been applied to the purchase of deficiency bills. In
reply to the hon. member for Warwickshire, he could only
pledge himself not to introduce any measure with regard to
cheques this session, when it could not be fully discussed.
With regard to the case of a holding from Lady-day to
Michaelmas this year, and the quitting, he would of course
have to pay the extra 4d., as he held for the six months
over which the tax extended. In 1854 the House of Com-
mons did exactly what it was now asked to do. The in-
come tax was then 7d., and they doubled it for the first
half-year. That, hOwever, was overlooked, because, from
the necessities of the war, it was afterwards doubled for the
second half-year also. The hon. member for Lambeth had
made rather a formidable demand that incomes under £l5O
should be exempt, or if that could not be granted, that at
least workmen's wages should be relieved. If such was
allowed, the result would be that those paid by the week
would be exempted. The distinction, however, was unsound
in principle, andlwould be dangerous in practice. He be-
lieved that in truth a workman with £lOO paid weekly, was
a richer man than a clerk or curate with an annual salary.
The late Secretary of the Treasury had spoken of the mode
of payment. It was not a question as to the mode of payment.
The question was, whether the money should be raised with-
in the year 1859-60 for the service of that year and handed
over to the finance of 1860-61. If the money was not handed
over it should be raised by borrowing, and there was no use
in proposing a reduction of the revenue. The only other
course would be to reduce the expenditure ; if the
hon. baronet could do that, he would be glad ,of his assis-
tance.

Sir F. BARING said that the right hon. gentleman jus-
tified his course in levying the entire increase in the first
half-year by the precedent of the Russian war ; he could
only conclude from thence that the right hon. gentleman
intended to follow out the precedent fully and impose
another 4d. for the second half of this year ; if that were so,
it was not fair treatment of the House of Commons—(hear,
hear)—if it were not so, the right hon. gentleman was not
acting on his principle of making the income meet theex-
penditure. The country derived no advantage from the
course he was now taking, and great injury was done the
taxpayer.
Mr. DISRAELT said that all estimates of income and
expenditure were uncertain to seme extent. In his state-
ment last year hahad estimated the surplus at a million and
a half. It was no financial surplus, but a real surplus. It
was indeed afterwards reduced to £BOO,OOO, but that arose
from the fact that the demands arising out of the Russian
and Chinese wars were made, of which he could have no
expectation, and which reduced the surplus. This would
answer the objection of the hon. baronet the member for
Evesham, and show him that it was absolutely necessary to
leave a margin for income and expenditure, or the finances
of the country would never be in a safe position. (Hear.)
With regard to what the Chancellor of the Exchequer called
the mode of payment, the whole question lay in a nutshell.
Itcameto this. Whether, when it was necessary to levy a
tax, ought they not to make it as light as possible, and not
go out of their way to increase the grievance. The objec-
tions of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to his proposal
were based on the fallacy that he considered his proposal
to be a proposal for borrowing money. He denied that it
was so ; the money would be paid out of the revenues of
the country. The committoe had decided that the money
should be raised out of the revenue, and all that they had
to do was to see it was so raised, and that in the manner
least burdensome to the taxpayers. The Chancellor of the
Exchequer had got first-rate security, and it was his duty
to get the money in the manner most satisfactory to the
country. The mode he advised was strictly analogous
to that pursued by the Chancellor of the Exchequer with
regard to the Exchequer Bonds, and the whole matter ought
to be a mere matter of arrangement between the Chancellor
and the Bank of England. The fact was, the Chancellor
wanted in six months what the country wanted twelve to
pay, and the Bank of England must have changed very
much if they would not facilitate the arrangement. They
had given the Minister all the supplies he required, and it
was his duty to see that the money was raised in the man-
ner least burdensome to the taxpayer. The mode was in-
dicated by pointing out a means which had been previously
adopted by the right hon. gentleman; and they told him
that the Bank of Enoland was ready to assist him with all
the sums necessary for the public revenue, in the manner
least inconvenient to 4he country.
The amendment of Sir H. WILLOUGHBY, that instead of
the word "four-pence" in the resolutioh, the word "three"
should be inserted, was then put and negatived, and the
resolution was agreed to.
On the next resolution, !‘ That where any dividends, inte-
rest, or other profits or gains becoming due or payable half-
yearly, are assessed or charged half-yearly with the rate or
duty under the said act, there shall be charged upon the first
assessment or charge which shall be hereafter made on such
dividends, interest, profits, and gains, the additional rate or
duty of eightpeiice for overy twenty shillings of the half.

yearly amount thereof ; and where any, profits or gains
becoming due or payable quarterly are assessed or charged
quarterly with the rate or duty under the said act, there
shall be charged upon the first two quarterly assessments
or charges respectively which shall be hereafter made on
such last-mentioned profits and gains, the additional rate
or duty of eightpence for every twenty shillings of the
quarterly amount of such last-mentioned profits and gains ;
and the said additional rates and duties charged in such
half-yearly and quarterly assessments respectively shall be
collected and paid with and over and above the rates and
duties assessed or charged therein respectively under the
said act.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY moved as an amendment after
the word " thereof " to insert " for every one pound of divi-
dend on the Long Annuities expiring on the sth January,
1860, one farthing in the pound."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would not
detain the house on this question, which was one of the
difficulties essential to a uniform income tax. Those who
thought that the income tax could be recast and readjusted
would vote with the hon. baronet ; for it was true, if you
did that, you.might fix the amount at which every annuity
was taxed, and what part of the tax was derived from
capital, and what from income. But that was opposed to
the scheme of a uniform income tax, which declined to
notice any capital returned to a person in the form of in-
come; and any one who was in that position knew that
he was subject to the income tax in that form. If
they were to adopt the motion of the hon. baronet they
would find themselves entangled with a hundred other
oases as strong or stronger than this. The case of a
life annuity was not different in this respect from the long
annuities. In all these cases such an arrangement as was
proposed would lead to inextricable confusion. The ques-
tion had been already decided by the House of Commons at
different times; in the time of his right hon. friend the
present Home Secretary, and also in 1842, when Mr.
Ricardo raised and discussed the question on a motion like
that of the hon. baronet, and the house, having considered
it, decided against Mr. Ricardo and in favour of the pre
sent arrangement by a majority of 253 to 117. It would,
therefore, not be consonant with justice to adopt the motion.
Mr. HUBBARD said that the rate at which the tax was
payable was not at 4d. but Bd. for the year, and half the
payment of these annuities having gone, the Chancellor of
the Exchequer was about to resuscitate an extinct payment
for the purposes of the tax.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
was no doubt the case, but the Long Annuities only corres-
ponded with the case of the fundholder.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE wished to know if the tax was meant
to be 'prospective or retrospective ; as regarded the Long
Annuities, it must be retrospective.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
understand what the noble baronet meant by a retrospective
tax. It was in one sense retrospective, as it was laid on in
respect of time from the Ist of April last, and they were
now in July. He was sorry to say that was the case with
all the income tax acts to which this country had been sub-
jected. The act of 1842, far which the right hon. baronet
the member for Lincolnshire voted, was retrospective in
that sense. The tax was not laid, as the hon baronet said,
on a year's income, but on half ri year's income, but in many
cases the only mode of. ascertaining the half-year's income
was by assessing that of the whole year, and then halving
;t.

Mr. WALPOLE said it was clear that you could not, as
regarded the new income tax, draw a distinction between
the old and the new one, and if you subjected the Long
Annuities to the tax, the argument went to show that as
they expired in 1860, they ought only to be charged at the
rate of 3d. in the pound. But the right hon. gentleman
said that the mode of levying the tax proposed was con-
sistent with justice.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I only
said that it would not be just to adopt the amendment.
Mr. WALPOLE was glad to hear that, because they
would not be precluded from that poipt in the considera-
tion of the income• tax next year; and if it was re-imposed
it must be re-arranged, so as to make some difference be-
tween fluctuating and fixed incomes.
After a few words from Mr. MALINS and Mr. BARROW,
which were entirely lost in cries of " Oh," and " Divide,"
The amendment was put and negatived,
The original motion having been put,
Mr. DISRAELI rose to move an amendment. He had
no objection to the imposition of the tax to meet the defi-
ciency of four millions and a half, but he objected to the
mode in which the assessment was made. It was sought
to have the four millions raised by the tax paid in six
months, and he proposed that the payment should be dis •
tributed over 12 months. He moved that the two last lines
of the resolution be struck out.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER regretted
that the right hon. gentleman had moved that amendment.
The ways and means of the year were those which were paid
in the year, and taxes which were not paid within the year
were not the ways and means of the year. The hon. member
for Huntingdon had cavilled at him, and had alleged that
he ought to be content with getting two millions now and
two millions in 1861; because in 1854 he had ;proposed to
raise money on Exchequer Bonds, in anticipation of the
next half-year's income-tax and the malt tax, which could
not be paid within the year. His answer was two-fold—
what did they do in 1854 ? They asked the house for 12
millions of new taxes, and would it have been rational or
fair to say to the house that they should lay on the whole
12 millions of taxes in one year r But to request the pay-
ment of four millions of new taxes in one year was a very
different thing, as it was only one-third of the amount. If
the hon. gentleman asked why he (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) was content to take money by anticipation in
1854, his answer was because he could not help it, and be-
cause he could not have got in 12 millions of taxes in one
year. The second reason was that they hadsome experience
since 1854, and he had seen enough to cause him to know
that it was an undesirable experiment to repeat. The Go-
vernment of 1854 said—We will have five or six millions of
taxes imposed which cannot be received within the year,
but if the war should cease and the money comes in it may
be applied to the payment of the Exchequer Bonds. The
war did cease, and the money did come in, but Parliament
did not choose to recognise its applicability wholly to the
payment of Exchequer Bonds, but applied only two mil-
lions to that payment, and the rest to the ways and means
of the year. After that experiment, and when the probabi-
lity was that if the -Chancellar of the Exchequer borrowed
money now the loan would be continued, and the money
intended for it when it came declared to be part of the
ways and means of the year, he would tell the hon. gentle-
man that he would not provide four millions for the yearby
getting in only two millions at once. It might be said that
they gave the best security, and there was no better security
than consols; but the questionwas whether they would pro-
vide for the year within the year. The proposal of the right
hon. gentleman would no doubt be popular, since it was to
relieve the present at the expense of the future. But he
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) entreated the house to
listen to the words he was about to speak, for they were full
of meaning. The proposals the Government had made were
those which they deemed the smallest required by the state
• of the public interest and the demands on the national ex-
chequer. He had pointed out some of the demands that were
• coming upon them, includingaoo,ooo a-year of guarantees
for packets and telegraphs, not sanctioned by Parliament;
• and there was more in reserVe. Other questions had been
raised which were not at the present moment matured
enough to enable him to declare the views of the Govern-
ment upon them, but upon which the Government would
be compelled, perhaps before many days, to declare their
views. It was their absolute duty to take these exigencies
into account, which had shortly been explained. He there-
fore hoped the house would negative the proposal of the
right hon. gentleman. As responsible minister of the
Crown, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would give
the house this assurance, and would tell them that they
had not measured, and at this moment they could not mea-
sure the demands which were coming upon them in connec-
tion with the wants of the empire. (Hear.) He therefore
hoped the house would be disposed to give the Government
• the provision which they asked for the wants of the year.
If the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli), however,
thought fit to persist with his proposition, he would, since
it was not one for the imposition of taxation, but for the re-
lease of taxation, be able to bring it forward upon another
occasion, and not in the Committee of Ways and Means.
He trusted the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) would
therefore postpone it to some period during the progress of
tho bill, when he might be able, perhaps, to speak with a
fuller knowledge of the position in which he stood. The
words which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had just
spoken were uttered, he could assure the house, under a
deep sense of the responsibility of his position.
Mr, T. BARING said that if the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer meant to declare that such was the state of the
country, and such were the views of the Government, that
it was important to have this money within six months, he
for one should not oppose the proposition of the Govern-
ment ; but the right hon. I.entleman must be aware that
arrangements could be made to render the second portion of
the additional income tax available for every purpose of
this year's expenditure. With regard to the £600,000 of
applications for contracts, it was in the power of Govern-
ment to refuse them if they thought proper. The observe-
, tions of the Chancellor of the Exchequer seemed to indi-
cate a foregone conclusion to put on another 4d. in the
pound next February or March.
Mr. HENLEY did not see hew it would be possible to
levy this tax on the Consols, one-half year of which was
already past and gone, the next half -year not being payable
till January next. The effect would be that the holders of
Consols would only pay half the tax. However, if the
money must be got in within the year, the house could not
do otherwise than agree to the proposal. However, in con-
venient the proceeding might be, still, if the Government
really wanted the money within the financial year, he would
not refuse it them, although money to be received in the
next financial year could be made applicable by Exchequer
Bills. The right hon. gentleman's words certainly held out
a very alarming prospect of something looming in the dis-
tance.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, with re-
ference to a remark of the hon. gentleman the member for
Huntingdon, denied that he had any "foregone conclusion"
as to the taxes that must be imposed next year. As an
humble individual, it was his duty to labour to keep down
the expenditure as much as he could. That was a very un-
hopeful task just now, and he should not be able to succeed
in it without help from both sides of the house. He would
always urge the house as far as possible to meet the burdens
of the day in the day.
Mr. DISRAELI said the question had really assumed a
very difficult and serious aspect. He was never more sur-
prised in his life than at hearing the observations of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer just now. He would pass by
the right hon. gentleman's allusion to the pending contracts
or guarantees of £600,000 a year. It was well known that
pending contracts were in the power of the Government,
and no Government would enter in:o a guarantee where
there was any probability of a shilling being called for. But
the right hon. gentleman had made other appeals to the
house of a very serious character. However disagreeable
the communications made by the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer must usually be, it was one compensation that the
truth and the whole truth should be placed before the house,
and when the budget had been opened the house might
reasonably think they knew the depth and extent of the
liabilities of the country. But he collected from what
the Chancellor of the Exchequer had just said that the
house wore in the unenviable position of not having yet
been informed by the Minister of the full extent of their
liabilities. It was a mere mockery and delusion to con-
sult the house if the Minister was to treat them in
that manner. He trusted, therefore, that at least before
they had to legislate on this proposition, the Chancellor of
the Exchequer would condescend to enter into a complete
and sincere explanation. (Cheers.) He admitted the force
of the right hon. gentleman's plea, and he could not incur
the responsibility of pressing on the house to take a step in
the dark, when, after the annual exposition of the finances
of the country they were now told that they had but im-
perfect information. If, however, ho now waived the pro-
position he had made, he expected that at least before the
end of the session, although they might be told that foreign
politics were matters above the ken and comprehension of
the House of Commons, although diplotnacy might not deign
to reveal to them its mysteries, still, in matters of finance
the house should have a full revelation of those engage_
merits and responsibilities which had been so mysteriously
Intimated to them. (Cheers.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would beg
the right ght hon. gentleman to recollect that he had stated, as
clearly as he 00433 and such was the state into which our

finances had been brought, and very much by that habit of
prospective engagements, without the authority, of Parlia-
ment, which had been a growing evil for several years, and
which he was sorry to say he found, on acceding to office,
in a state such as he could hardly have believed—that even
with respect to English finances, it was not in his power,
three weeks after coming into office, to convey to the House
of Commons a complete view of their present and proapec-
tive condition. (Hear, hear.) But there were other ques-
tions than those of English finance, and those lie had es e'
cially in view. The right hon. gentleman said it was his
absolute duty to communicate fo the House of Commons
everything bearing on the condition of our finances ; but
the right hon. gentleman himself had been sixteen months
in office, and ought to have obtained a tolerably clear view".
of the financial exigencies of the empire. (Hear, hear.)
He remembered that the noble lord at the head ofthe In-
dian Government in the late Administration announced that
the requirements of the Indian exchequer were seven mil-
lions, and then, after that clear and distinct statement it was
discovered that four or five millions more were required.
(Hear.) If he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had now
used words which could convey any idea that there was any
political significance in what he had said of covert demands,
that was as far as possible from his intention ; ho had not
the slightest intention of the kind, and was referring only to
financial exigencies. Of course it was his duty to bring
these fully before the house, but his knowledge of them
was limited. With a world-wide empire new demands might
come upon us, and new features of our financial situation
might develop themselves from time to time.
Mr. DEEDES said he felt that however tempting the
proposition of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli)
might be, he could not now throw any impediment in the
way of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the responsi-
bility must be cast Son the executive.

The resolutions respecting the income tax were then put
and agreed to. _

On the third resolution, "That, toward raising the
supply granted to her Majesty, the time limited for
payment of the duty of excise on malt by ever,'
maltster, or maker of malt, who shall have given
security by bond in the manner directed by the act passed
in that behalf in respect of all malt begun to be made on or
after the Ist day of October, 1859, shall be twelve weeks in
lieu of eighteen weeks after the making of such account or
return of duty as in the said act is mentioned," •
Mr. PULLER said the effect of this resolution would be
to drive out of the trade all the small maltsters, and it would
make void the bonds which every.maltster had entered into.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was
admitted on all hands that if the system of malt credits was
ever to be modified at all it could not be modified more
gently than in the mode proposed, which was, only to curt
the credits six weeks, and the first year they allowed a dis-
count. With regard to the question of the bonds he would
examine into that matter, and see whether there was likeg
to be any serious difficulty on the part of the traders wi
regard to them.

-Sir J. SHELLEY said he thought the right hon. geutlr
man had dealt very lightly with the malting interest.in tho
proposal under consideration.

After a few words from Mr. DOBSON the resolution
was agreed to, and the Chairman left the chair, and the
house resumed.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Lord PALMERSTON said it might be for the conveni-
ence of the house that he should state, it having been un-
derstood that there was io be a morning sitting to-mor-
row, for the purpose of taking two bills into consideration.
—namely, a bill of his right hoz. friend the. Home
Secretary, concerning the London Corporation, and a bill
providing for a new Poor-law arrangement—that the Cor-
poration Bill had.been postponed till Wednesday, and that
the Poor-law Bill was to be taken to-morrow evening. It
was not necessary, therefOre,. that the proposed sitting
should take place to-morrow. The estimates ,would be
taken to-morrow evening. (Hear, hear.)
SUPPLY.
_ _ _

The report of the Committee of Supply was brtiught up,
and the several resolutions were agreed to, the Chancellor
of the Exchequer taking occasion when the vote for the
maintenance of prisons was put to state, in reply to gr.
Newdegate, that the Government had at present no planfor the establishment of a penal colony under their conside-
ration.
The Cambridge University Commission (Continuance)
Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Criminal Justice Middlesex (A.sssistant-Judge) Bill
was read a third time and passed.
The Ecclesiastical Commission Bill was read a second
time.

The Bankruptcy and Insolvency (Ireland) Bill passed
through Committee.
The Pawnbrokers' Bill, the :Universities (Scotland) -BA
and the Consolidated Fund 07,000,000) Bill were each rem'
a second time.
The Roman Catholic Relief. Act Amendment Bill waS
withdrawn.
The Diplomatic Pensions .Bill.went through committee;
The house then went into committee upon the Municipo
Corporations Bill, when
Mr. STEUART moved that the Chairman report pro'
gr9ss ; and, after some conversation, • the motion was
agreed to.

STATE . F. THMES.
Sir S. M. PETO moved fora select
committee to inquil
into the causes of the present state of the river Thames, and
to suggest such remedies as.might be deeded expedient for
its improvement.
Mr. BLACKBURN thought . the subject too important
to be discussed at that late hour, and he therefore move
the adjournment of the house.
Lord PALMERSTON said that this matter had been
fully considered by a committee last year, and he thereto!!!
hoped that his hon. friend would not persevere with nw
motion.

After at short discussion the question was put, and, the
motion for adjournment having been carried without II
division,
The house adjourned at two o'clock. ' '

COUNTRY MARKETS.

MANCHESTER-JULY 21:

The market was somewhat firmer, and wheat •was take!.
to a fair extent at the prices of this day se'nnight. Other
articles were about stationary.

BIRMINGHAM-JuLY 2L

A short supply of wheat which was cleared of at an ad'
Vance of is per qr. Barley and oats inquired after. Feo
were the turn cheaper. Beans unaltered.

LOUTH—JULY 20.
A small attendance to-day at the corn-exchange, and s
very limited business transacted. The few sales we hew',
of were of wheat, at a reduction of 2s to 3s per quarter.'
for red and mixed 40s to 43s per qr.