The Sun.
London, England, 1861-02-20 00:00:00

rreahe ennt soi vf
extent, attain the object and did not involve in it any unsafe rests and r re judices ? He very much doubted whether the
tendency of operations. But my hon. friend and the hoUso time had r to t come when Parliament would see an end of
e t
he measures
small
boron on this ig h
Bs subject.
and
th e
rTo
da
ikae-
should recollect that it was with reference to this precise great
subject—not the question between land and personalty, bu
between fixed property and those incomes which do not pro-
traution of I. seab Did
gthrteeadtiasnfrdan PcehmisPe
ceed from fixed property—and for the purpose of reducing I. not every one see that these small
the balance, that the Succession Duty Act was introduced. boroughs A could •be impediments in the way of carrying a
There was an opinion which received countenance froli!, gre at and c( mire .ehensive measure, and that they would so
former Governments and prevailed widely in the house an continue f( sr n iany years ? What constitutional means
country, that the burden of taxation as a whole was such
°xis red of ow ;rooming the objections of the •
that it called for some increased relative burden on fixed. • • proprietors ?
property. It was for the purpose of meeting that feeling
lii asked wI e they reform had not many distinct parts, and
that the Succession Duty Act was introduced. We said, whe tiler they' might not with advantage and ease be treated_
"We know not how to reconstruct the income-tax, but we distil ectly—wl tether, indeed, the house was not more likely
can apply a means for increasing. the relative burden on fixed
to arrive at a cool, dispassionat®, and safe conclusion by
property." I think the passing of the Succession Duty Act _ .
ybe taken as fairly setting at rest any question of th is taking th em Si -pastel rather than all together. (Hear,
mnaature. (Hear.) I hope my hon. friend will also bear in hear.) ' rhere was the borough franchise separate from the
mind that we were in hopes we had got rid of what are ealled county f ranchise, a/ad both were separate from the mode of
questions of class legislation. He knows very well that no voting, either seer stly or openly. Then there was the die-
plan of this kind has over obtained authoritatrve support
franchi sement of those boron
ghs which were thought un-
It was pressed upon Mr. Fitt and Sir H. Peel, and rejected
by them as entirely impossible. This house appointed a el -orthy• to retadn two representatives, and many other ques-
committee to examine into the subject. The committee sat teens tearing on reform might be treated with advantage
for two years and made no report, and the only plan sub- by separe.ting them from each other, and by giving each a
witted to the committee has been condemned to-night lry
dis tinct consideration, '
my hon. friend himself. Gentlemen of the highest intent-(Hear, hear.) It appeared to h; m,
1 1, ina t the
gene, who were thoroughly conversant with the subject, .oo tr, o state of parties, that they had gone beyond
went into that committee predisposed to some alteration, the time when great and comprehengive measures were
but they came out of it thoroughly convinced that the thing like ly to be carried, and if there was to be a practical reform
was impracticable, and, if practicable, would be mis- in t his cot •ntry it must be presented, examined, discussed,
chievous. (Cheers.) My hon. friend ought to bear in mind
and decide Ipoint by •
that this is, after all, a question which sets class
imme-
diately in conflict with class. It is a question, "You shall the : membei - for London had made use of a figure much re-
pay more—l shall pay less." The mode in which he would peat ed since • The noble lord had said that a great wave
give effect to the principle is most objectionable, and the prier-
of public faniur was required to carry a measure of reform
ciple itself is fraught with danger to the country. fire over the bar of the House of Lords. That might be
the
House of Commons has been at all times ready to adopt
of those e
every practicable method for lightening the operation a the case if it was ono gr at comprehensive measures—a
income-tax in those cases where it bears most hardly. To first-rate ship of the line, or Queen's ship, but aesmalr.
such cases as I have mentioned—those of the poorest payers barque might find water enough to float it over the bar and
of the tax—the attention of the house may be directed wath might afterwards obtain a safe anchorage in the Constitu-
advantage, without the slightest apprehension of introdu c- tion. (Hear, and a laugh.) The right hon. gentleman
ing a dangerous principle in operation. But Ido hope that .
while the house retains the anxiety to apply practical re- opposite had been pleased Le make himself merry withthose
medics in cases of hardship, they will remember the great i private and independent members who were so arrogant
social dangers -which arise from agitation and the excite- as to presume to offer to the house a measure
ment of expectations which cannot be fulfilled, and likewise ye this kind, and the term he applied to them was
the enormous importance of the fiscal instrument with
Li t " h kst " He really
tia o f "hucksters." ers. wondered that the right
which _they are undertaking to meddle. (Hear, hear.)
These !objections appear to me to apply in the fullest force ht in. gentleman, who had himself for all but two years of
to the plan of my hon. friend. That plan, as I say, is hisl public life been a "huckster," should have cast that im-
stamped on the motion which is made for a committee of putAtion,on private and independent members • and when
the inquiry, and the Government, believing that no good could
sight hon, gentleman ' on. entered on a Governmental
arise from a committee of inquiry so undertaken, but that
it must result either in evil or disappointment, cannot do branch of trade he did not carry it on with so much advari,-
, ptherwise than recommend the house to put a negative on tage as to be entitled to assume so high a tone with private
th,- motion of my hon. friend. (Cheers,) members, for in a very short period his Governmental
1 Mr. WHALLEY, who rose amid loud cries for a division, business terminated in bankruptcy. The right hon.
his regret gen-
expresseel that the Chancellor of the Exchequer
tleman seemed quite at a loss to understand the motives
had not had the opportunity of replying to his plan, because which influenced him and the member for East Surrey to
ee from all the objections made to the plan
it was entirely I"."persevere with measures of this nature ; but the answer
of the hon. membe:. It was simply that such portio.o of was so simple that he was ashamed to trouble the house
the revenue as was rei;uired to be raised by a property .and with it. He earnestly believed in the truth of the
mode and on t
the prin-
incomed in same ile
tax should be raise ciples of reform. It was because ho was a Reformer—be-
samete. The bills for the proven-
principles as the poor-ra. cause there weirs rights which ought to be redressed, that ha
tion of adulteration and the punt;,:hment of forgers of trade having special information bearing on the subject, and see-
marks had become necessary from tu..„., wholesale demorali-
. ing that it was the determination of the Government not to
resulted from the
sation of the trading classes; which has . bring forward any measure of reform, felt it in the light of
• -
income-tax. In answer to the observations of the Chem a duty to introduce the bill which he now offered to the
re
cellor of the Exchequer that the Succession Duty Act was d and house. The t-
• question of reform and of the rights of the
sufficient settlement of the question between lant..9 ,
n o land
personal property, he reminded the right hon. gentlen.a , ( 11,e pe, the wrongs of those excluded from the frau-
that the Constitution of the country from the earliest perioa ei.'-tise, were the same this year as in last year. (Hear.)
recognised lantras the sole source from which the burdens Th erefore, if others failed in their duty, or, being differ-
of the State should be defrayed. end •. circumstanced, thought it no longer their duty to
Mr. HUBBARD, in reply, complained that the Chan-
brio 1 forward measures of this
kind, he did not see why
cellor of the Exchequer had not treated the question before
private . and independentmembers
-should be prevented
them on its merits, but had endeavoured to meet the force
from thane• -e so. That the
y were founded on good princi-
of the arguments which he had used by a mere reference to lot be
pies would 1. .
raced denied
in his bill and the in that house, inasmuch as the
bill of the hon.
the effect which might be produced on particular classes.
He (Mr. Hubbard) had deprecated invidious references to two points embraced
extreme cases, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he was Blot
member for Surrey were taken from the measure
introduced by the Government last year. (Hear, hear.)
sorry to say, had not thought proper to take the saw®
To the objection urged by the noble lord at the head of the
course. The right hon. gentleman endeavoured to get up a
Government and also by the noble lord the member for
feeling of sympathy for the fundholders, as persons in the
London, that the cone/try did not want reform (hear,
position of women and children and. small annuitants ; but
hear), he answered that nothing was more certain than
it was not statesmanlike to single out individuals and
that the deliberate opinion of the people of England was
claim on their behalf the rejection of a measure like the
present, as if it were calculated to benefit
in favour of reform (" Hear," and some cries of "No Is
rich landlords
only. (Hear, hear.) He wished the house to understand and that that opinion would sooner or later find expres -
that he did not desire to confine the committee to his own sion, and carry a measure of reform to a triumphant
plan. He thought he had sufficiently guarded himself from issue. (Hear, hear.) Could ,this be doubted when during
any such imputation ; but the truth was, that his right hon. the last nine years reform hat? been brought forward by
friend would not have been satisfied whatever course he four successive Governments, amd when the extension of
might have taken. If he had simply asked fora committee
his right hon. friend would have referred to Mr. Humes the rights of the people had b een recommended by the
committee, and pointed out how little it was able to do after Queen front the throne ? Could it be doubted, above all,
sitting for two years. He had brought forward a scheme after the last general election, which took place on the issue
that was plain and feasible, and he was told that to grant a
of reform or no reform, or, at any rate, on the
issue
of Lord.
committee would be to identify it with his scheme, and that
the house ought not to commit itself in that way. (Hear, Derby's reform or Lord J. Russell's reformi? It was well
hear.) The house knew the terms of the motion which he known that Lord John Russell sketched out his plan of re-
had submitted, and it was en the terms of that motion alone form, and the very point on which it differed most from the
that he asked them to decide. (Hear, hear.) plan of the right hon. gentleman opposite was in regard to
Sir S. NORTHCOTE rose amid loud cries of "Divide."
the borough franchise' which the present bill sought to ex-
ile only wished to explain to his hon. friend who had just tend. He might, then, saytheGovernment
that
spoken the course which he should feel it is duty to pursue stood on the basis of an extended borough franchise.
if he pressed his motion to a division, and to express the hope (Hear.) It was not consistent, and he did not know that it
that after the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
and the expression of feeling on the part of the house, heright, in this ' ;but
was
would not ask them to divide. (Hear, hear.) The nature it was their duty, aft®, what had taken place in respect to
of the proposal his hon. friend had made was one that it the manner in which they were put into office, to give
would be quite impossible to carry out to a satisfactory re- every facility to independent members in bringing forward
salt. They could not separate the appointment of the com- point by point those greatwhich they had
principles them-
mittee from a favourable reception of his plan, and he could - - -
not shut his eyes to the fact that there were many objections selves been compelled to abandon: (Hear, hear.) He bee
to the adoption of thaeplan. (Hear.) The inequalities to lieved that there was an amount of dissatisfaction arising
which it would give rise were sufficiently obvious. Take in. the country in consequence of the declaration made by
the case of Schedule D, in which his hon, friend proposed the noble lord the member for London at the opening of the
a reduction of 33 per cent. Schedule D included incomes session. He neither blamed nor praised the course taken by
not only from trades, but professions; but a great income the noble lord that
onoccasion, but he had heard from wive-
derived from a trade in which a large capital was employed
cal quarters that great dissatisfaction had been caused by it.
would be put on the same footing with that received by a
lawyer, who by a day's ill-health might be deprived of his He knew that a great many of his constituents were greatly
income altogether. (Hear.) His hon. friend had discharged grieved by the tone then adopted, and he believed that still
his conscience by bringing forward this subject, and had more dissatisfaction would be created• by the tone adopted
given the house an opportunity of considering his scheme. that .
ni ht by the noble lord at the head of the Government.
He hoped he would be satisfied with having done so, and
not put his friends to the pain of voting against him. (Di- - (Hear, hear.) The assurances 'which he received, both in
vide, divide.) and out of the house, convinced him that it was the sin-
The house divided, when the numbers were- cere and earnest desire of a vast number of honest men to
For the motion
Against it '
Majority
The announcement of the numbers was received with house. It was undoubtedly his intention to persevere in
loud cheering. asking the assent of the house to the measure which he
BURIAL OF DISSENTERS. moved for leave to introduce, because for several
Sir M. PETO obtained leave to bring in a bill to make years he, not taking an extreme position in politics or on
further provision with respect to the burial of Pitersons not
this question of reforml had been convinced that the eaten-
being members of the Church of England as by w estab-
m.
fished. on of the borough franchise was a measure of justice,
safety, and true statesmanlike wisdom. He believed that
he should be able to prove such an advancement on the
part of the people of this country, especially among those
dwelling in boroughs, in education, intelligence, and poli-
tical knowledge--such an improvement in religion, in tem-
perance, providence, and in fact in everything which con-
stituted men fit to exercise the elective franchise—that it
was no longer wise, and he did not know that it would be
any longer safe, to delay the admission of the great class
which his bill embraced to the full privileges of the Con-
stitution. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member concluded by
moving for leave to bring in a bill to extend the franchise
in boroughs in England and Wales.
Mr. HADFIELD seconded the motion. Half. the revenue
of the country was paid in taxation by the. classes who
were not represented. That was a state of things that
, could not be allowed to continue much longer. With what
hilarity, wit, and playfulness the noble lord had treated the
subject the house would, no doubt, remember; and the
country would remember it also. (Hear.) ,Tho industrious
classes of society could no longer be treated with indif-
ference. • - ,
Lord PALMERSTON said—Any one who hid just come
into the house, and who, had only heard the observations of
my hon. friend who has proposed this motion, would really
imagine that I had announced an intention of opposing it.
But so far from that, I distinctly stated I should not op-
pose either the present motion or that of the hon. member
for East Surrey (Mr. L. King). As to the remarks of my
hon. friend on the tone of the observations I made at an
earlier period of the evening, his criticism—if I may use
the term—is totally misapplied. I am not conscious of
anything in my tone open to the objections he has made.
(Hear, hear.) I am not conscious of the hilarity and levity
he describes. I certainly did state plainly that the house
last session indicated in the most conchisive manner
its indisposition—(" No, no," and cheers)—to pass the
measure of reform we proposed, which measure combined
in itself both the proposals of my hon. friends plus anothe
measure that I thought very likely tohe proposed by some
other independent member—(hear, hear)—and I stated that
the decision of the house given by that indisposition—for I
may call it a decision, since it led to the withdrawal of the.
bill—was not followed by any strong indication in the na-
tion at laige of displeasure with the course the house pur-
sued. I stated that my objections to reintroduce the mea-
sure of last year were two—one as to the point of time, the
other in point of substance. I think that a sufficient inter-
val of time has not elapsed to lead us to suppose that the
opinion of the house is much altered ; and, in substance,
the two proposals now made approach so nearly the provi-
sions of the measure the house did not approve, that I do
not think either measure is likely to be more successful
than the bill we introduced. I stated that the Government
had not thought it their duty to bring in this Session the
measure of last year. My hon. friend, in the first place,
condemned the Government for not having brought in a
comprehensive measure ; but in the further progress of
his reasoning, his mind appeared to come to a clearer
conception of the nature of things—(laughter)—for
he then told us it was more particularly the function of
private mambo: s to introduce reforms of this sort. (Cheers.)
But I do not think he held out a very brilliant prospect of
success in the instances he quoted of private members who
laboured for a great number of years before they aceom-
plished the ends they had in view. I can only say I do not
think his observations apply to the course the Government
has adopted. I offered ne objection to bringing in this bill;
but I simply said, we shall not think it our duty to make
way for bills like this and that of the hon. member for East
Surrey by giving up for them days that may be appropri-
ated to the public business. (Hear, hear.)
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
POST-OFFICE SAVINGS BANK.

BOROUGH FRANCHISE.

--- -
Mr. BAINES, in rising to move for leave to bring in a
bill to extend the Parliamentary franchise in the boroughs
of England and Wales, said that the object of the bill was
single and simple—viz., to extend the franchise which was
fixed by the Reform Act of 1832 at £lO to £6, according
to the bill proposed by the Government last year. His
belief was that such a measure might be discussed by this
house with greater advantage than in the form of those
great and comprehensive measures hitherto introduced. He
had not intended saying anything on the merits of his bill,
for he had reason to hope its introduction would not be re-
sisted. But, after the observations of the noble lord at the
head of the Government atop early period of the evening,
the tendency of which was io discredit and impede motions
such as the present, and after the observations of the right
hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli), the house would,
he trusted, in fairness allow him to offer a few observations
on the remarks of those distinguished persons. He must
express his great regret at the tone which the noble lord
(Palmerston) had adopted on the question of reform, upon
which the noble lord had come into office. •
Mr. HARDY rose to order. He wished to know whether
the hon. gentleman was in order in referring to a speech
made in a debate on another subject.
The SPEAKER—The hon. member will bear in mind
that the noble lord in his speech referred to two measures,
only one of which was then before the house. (Cheers.)
Mr. BAINES said he was replying to observations made
by the noble lord, in anticipation of his motion. He re •
peated that he regretted the tone of the noble lord. One
might have supposed that a Minister sincerely attached to
that cause on which his Government was based, if he had
not thought it wise or expedient to bring forward a measure
himself, would still think it his duty to the principles
he espoused not to throw obstructions in the way of pri-
vate members. (Cheers.) The noble lord's first objection
was that these measures would interfere with the other
business of Parliament. He stood in the midst of mem-
bers who had had more experience than himself, but he
challenged the noble lord, whose experience extended
over half a century, to adduce a single session in which
a measure like the present could be more conveniently
introduced. What great and absorbing question of public
interest was about to demand their attention ? There was
a Bankruptcy Bill before the house, 50 clauses of which
were agreed to in a single night, and which was likely to
pass before Easter. What other measure was before Par-
liament ? What question involving foreign danger or do-
mestic crisis existed that need prevent the discussion of his
bill ? The noble lord made another objection. He said it
was not expedient for private members to introduce ques-
tions of reform. But he would ask the noble lord to look
around him on the Treasury bench and see whether almost
every man there had not first introduced as a private mem-
ber those reforms which ho afterwards as a Minister car-
ried to a successful issue. (Hear, hear.) Tile noble lord
the member for the city of London in 1819, eleven years
before he took office, asked for leave to bring in a bill on
the subject of Parliamentary Reform, having reference
to the borough of Leeds. Did not that noble lord also
move for leave to bring in a bill to repeal the Test and
Corperation Acts when he was oat of office ? Tho
same might be said of most of the great questions of
late years. He knew that these measures had been intro-
duced by men of distinction and talent, while himself and
his hon. friend (Mr. L. King) were very humble in position.
Still that did not affect the principle. Did not Lord Grey
introduce a measure of reform 40 year's before he carried rt
ilm of o
Parliamentary and other
Reformemine whennt me n
out as a Minister ? Did not Mr. Wilberforce for 20 years
urge as a private member the abolition of the slave trade?
very
cile
ouufneskilh
teitt brought in abill for Catholic
osMEmancipation
s xry lerrk.
when
he,
too, was out of office. Did not the
hon. members for Rochdale and Birmingham contend in
any
yt
official
fmorenathbeerasbotliootikontipofththe
questioncorn
fnleat?:
The greatest measures had been, in years before
sin(litreoadri;
those who were not •in office, and forced upon those who
were in office. But then it introduced by
was said Parliamentary Reform
ought to be treated as a
seen,great and comprehensive question.
After what they had
treated ? Was it not beet could .use it had continue
u to be
thus treated
Oat it ilaci failed—bmitee imt.r.
it attacked many

The second reading of this bill was postponed till Friday.
BANKRUPTCY.

The report of the committee on the Bankruptcy and In-
soh ency bill was brought up and agreed to.
The house adjourned at a quarter to 12 o'clock.

Lonnoar :sfrranindtedr,anterd P,uabtuTtedz
SUN
011ffiliclet,DN00.Y11207TtrGa,No. 112, uacit,
in ot of the Savoy. in the County of lifddleson ,
ry eduersday, Februali VI Is6l. ,