The Sun.
London, England, 1861-04-17 00:00:00

sons occupy who signed the papers ? I suppose
they were rather in humble stations.

Mr. Selfe--No. In the first place almost every
clergyman in the parish had a number of papers to
be filled up. District visitors, Roman Catholic
priests, and dissenting ministers, were all employed
in a similar manner.

Was any invitation given to the people to come
for relief?

Mr. Selfe—No. We were asked if we could not
devise some plan by which the destitution might be
met. We did not consider it our primary duty to
give away large sums of money.
The Chairman—That is foreign to the duty which
the magistrates have to discharge ?
Mr. Selfe—lt is. It is no portion of our legiti-
mate duty. I may mention this peculiar circum-
stance, that during the whole of that distress there
never was a time when the amount of crime was
less. The conduct of the poor persons was beyond
all praise.

kr. Knox, the police magistrate of Worship-
street, was next examined—He stated that the sum
forwarded to his court was £2,000, and that the
machinery employed for its distribution consisted
of four warrant officers and a general clerk. The
usual amount received was about £4OO. He had
followed the steps of his predecessor, and found it
impossible to carry on the distribution without the
assistance of the clergy and other influential per-
sons. Ho made a personal visit to the distressed
districts, where he found great destitution and dis-
tress many persons being without a vestige of
clothing, food; fire, or bedding. The relief given
consisted of bread, coals, and Is. 6d. in money. He
had no reason to complain of the conduct of the
parochial or relieving officers. Not one-half the
poor made an application to the officers for relief.
He did not think it the duty of the officers to look
for cases of distress.
The committee then adjourned:

• INCOME AND PROPERTY TAX.
The select committee appointed on the motion of
Mr. Hubbard, to inquire into the present mode of
assessing and collecting the income and property
tax, and whether any improved mode of levying
the same can be adopted, met yesterday. The com-
mittee consists of Mr. Hubbard (chairman), Mr.
Baxter, Mr. Bentinck, Mr. Cardwell, Mr. Cave, Mr.
Crawford, Mr. Sotheron-Esteourt, Sir W. Heath-
cote, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Lowe,
Sir S. Northcote, Sir F. Heygate, Mr. Ricardo,
Mr. Turner, and r. Pollard Urquhart.
Mr. Pressly, Chairman of the Inland Department
of the Board of Revenue, was examined. He said
he had given evidence before a committee of the
house on the property and income tax in 1851. At
that time he was one of the commissioners of in-
come and property tax, and of course he was still
more acquainted with the working of the act from
his subsequent experience in office. The witness,
after giving a succinct history of the working of
the act of Sir R. Peel in 1842, and subsequent acts
down to the present time, went on to say, in answer
to the chairman, that the commissioners, except
three special commissioners, were unpaid. The
parish collectors were paid by a per tentage of lid.
in the pound. The per tentage did not increase in
proportion to the increase of the income tax. He
believed it was impossible to pay them by salary,
though he admitted the collectors in poor and widely
extended districts might have double the trouble of
those in rich and compact neighbourhoods, but it
would certainly be better to pay them by salary if
the districts could be so arranged as to afford them
constant occupation, and the commissioners had had
that subject under consideration, with a view of
submitting it to the Government. At present the
collectors were appointed by the parishes. He
did not think that a desirable mode of appoint-
ment ; and if a change were made in that respect,
he would recommend that the collectors should be
appointed by the Government itself, and • also the
assessors. In the assessment of lands and houses,
he thought the assessors could make no mistake,
although they were
.guided by the returns of indi-
viduals. In many instances of assessment under
schedule A they were not based upon previous
assessments.

In reply to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, wit-
ness said he had every reason to be satisfied with
the administration of the law of the income tax, as
administered by the local commissioners. As re-
garded the qualifications of individuals in his own
department they were very much improved of late
years—they were a better class of men, better
educated, and better paid, and the system of pro-
motion was now entirely free from political influ-
ence.

Mr. Timm, also of the Inland Revenue D?part•
ment, gave some further details of the working o
the Property and Income Tax Act.
The committee then adjourned.

THE BOARD OF ADMIRALTY.
The select committee of the House of Commons
appointed to inquire into the constitution of the
Board of Admiralty, and other matters relating
thereto, met for the examination of witnesses. Mr.
Henley presided. The other members of the com-
mittee are Lord Clarence Paget, Sir James Elphiu-
stone, Sir F. Baring, Mr. Beaumont, Mr. Bentiuck,
Mr. Corry, Mr. Bruce, Mr. Clay, Mr. Deedes, Ad-
miral Duncombe, Sir J. Graham, Mr. Finlay, Sir
John Pakington, Sir Michael Seymour, Mr. Whit-
bread, Sir H. Willoughby, and Sir J. Paxton.
The Duke of Some's-A was the only witness
examined yesterday. In the course of Lis evidence,
and in reply to a question by Admiral Duncombe,
whether the progression of the duties of the Admi-
ralty, as worked by the board, had worked so well
that he saw no reason to alter it, his grace said his
experience of the, office led him to think that
some alteration in the distribution of the duties
might be made with advantage ; he thought some
members of the board had too much to do, and that
others had less than they could perform. The re-
distribution of some of the duties might be advan-
tageous ; but at the same time all changes of that
kind require a good deal of consideration.

In reply to aquestion by Sir James Elphinstone,
his grace said he did not think that the manage-
ment of the Admiralty in France Ni as better than in
England, and it was a singular fact that while the
establishment of a Minister of Marine, and a similar
system to that in France, was very often advocated
here, the English system is just as much praised in
France, although no change has taken place in
either country. All such measures as the con-
struction of new iron ships, or the conversion of
sailing vessels into steamers, are discussed at the
board, but there is no report of their proceedings
unless they should result in an order, when the
minute of the order is the report. The mode in
which veisels are converted depends on the orders of
the comptroller. The committee adjourned at half•
past three o'clock.