The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-13 00:00:00

that his lion. Friend, the Member for West Surrey had
spoken too loosely of maintaining the pH ic credit.
Certainly, allusions to that subject had of hte bsen free
quent enough to he somewhat C ,rinidahle and alarming;
but let it not be forgotten that when they ;allsed of the
public !clef., the agricultural constituencies—he did not
say the agricalturel Membere, but they might ha chaneed
and successors, with other feelings be substituted for
them—felt that their property was being sacrificed
under circumstances which little inclined them to apply
the epithe'.., " public faith," or " public honour" to the
mode in which it was done.—(Cheers from the Protec-
tionist:.) Let no Hon. Gentleman say that he coun-
tenanced these things. Not at all. He put forward
these remarks in refereece to the whole system of the
expenditure of this country, and he trusted t eat those
who had been advocating reduction would not content
themselves wish gibes and jeers at his Hon. Friend,
but would show how the principles they extolled so
loudly were compatible with the existing state of things
and how it was they were prepared to rt fuse to the agri-
culturists either a remrn to the system which had been
abandoned, or at all events a consistent carrying out of
the principles which, being acted on to their injury,
were denied them to their benefit.—(Hear, hf ar.) The
Right Hon. Baronet asked them whether they would
have an excise placed on the farmer to the amount of
300 per cent. which was exacted at the Customhouse
on the foreign grower of tobacco. To that he (Mr.
S'afford) replied, that he was not called upon to say
whether he would or not—that was not the argument.
If they were to have free trade let them have it, and let
the authors of the free-t-ade doctrine arrange the revenue
as they pleased. Precisely the same argument was
applicable with regard to malt ; aid he asked,
whilst this system of one-sided legislation was per-
sisted in, how could the agriculturists be expected
to feel that attachment to the Legislature which was
desirable? The Right Hon. Baronet and Right Hon.
Gentlemen upon the Treasury bench had told them that
the price of corn would certainly rise—would they tell
him at what price eheapners erased to be a blessing and
became a curse? Why, if cheapness were all in all, did
they promise that that bright vision of approaching
cheapness would soon be dimned by the cloud of return-
ing high prices?—(Bear, hear.) The question might
be delayed for a time, but it could not be staved off alto-
gether, and it would be the duty of those who repre-
sented constituencies which suffered the most severely to
bring the matter forward again and again, to protest
against their one-sided legislation, t 3 warn them of the
coming danger, and to tell them that no majority in that
House, and no apparent triumphs of skilled and practised
debaters could convince a set of men whose fortunes
were being sacrificed to feel that attachment to the Le-
gislature which the farmers cf England had always been
accustomed to feel, and in feeling which they had always
stood by the institutions of the country.—(Cheers.)

Lord J. RUSSELL said it was not his intention to
have addressed the House upon the present motion, be-
cause it appeared to him too vague in its character, and
susceptible of no kind of explanation, had not the for.
Gentleman who had just sat down at that cool hour of
the evening made so very warm a speech. Ha could not
help, therefore, taking notice of some cf his doctrines.
He understood the motion of the Hon. Gentleman to be,
a great reduction of taxation. The Hon. Member for
Northamptonshire seemed to imply by his speech that
they impeded all rejection by the course they took; but
he denied that that was the case. It seemed to him, that
with the heavy debt they had, and for which they were
paying 28,000,0001. interest—with the expenses of the
Consolidated Fund and the full and half-pay—there was
very little, if these charges were to be defrayed, upon
which the reduction could be made,; unless by
reducing the number cf men in the army and navy.
It had been properly observed by the Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth, that after the
votes of last night it could not be set aside by
any division that might take place that night. How,
under such circumstances, the Hon. Member far West
Surrey Ras to arrive at any considerable reduction of
expenditure, it was impossible for him to say. One
Hon. Member bad a motion on the paper for a reduction
of 10 per cent. upon all official salaries; but if they took
off 10 per cent. from all, including the members of the
Cabinet, it would just add to the public revenue the sum
of 40,0001., and what would he the great reduction of
taxation derived from that saving he would leave to the
Hun. Gentleman to explain.—(Hear, hear.) Whe.her
the reduction was right or not was another question,
.which he should not discuss; but if they were to pre-
serve the public faith and the national credit, and to pay
and defray the tensions of the soldiers and sailors
whom they had voted for the service of that year, and
if they did not think these numbers excessive, there was
hardly any great reduction that could be made. It was
said that the Government derived a great advantage
from being assisted one night by one side of the
House, and the next night by the other side. Why, it
would be more advantageous to them, if it was prac-
ticable, for them to adopt either one or the other of
these motions. If they had taken the suggestion of the
Honourable Member for Montrose they would probably
have his support and that of his friends, and if they
supported the restoration of the import duties on
corn the Government was assured that they would have
had the support of Hon. Gentlemen on the other side.—
(Hear, hear.) It was, therefore, putting themselves in
a position of greater difficulty, and was not giving them-
selves a fair chance, when they came forward and said
that they agreed with neither one side nor the other.
Why did they do so? Simply because such was their
conviction. The Hop. Gentleman opposite had told
them that if they went on in their present course those
who sat on his side of the 1101130 would be inclined to vote
for measures dangerous to the institutions of the coun-
try. It was impossible for him to believe that that
statement could have any foundation.
Mr. A. STAFFORD said his remark was, not that
they should do so, but that they would be removed by
their constituents, and that their successors might do so.
Lard. J. RUSSELL—The Hon. Geniteman in the
first part of his argument made no such reserve.—(Cries
of " Hear, hear," and " No, no.") Well, then he
would take it in the other sense. It was said that the
agricultural i epresentatives would vote for mea-
sures dangerous to the institutions of the coun-
try, on the first alternative, it was a libel on the
party to which the Hon. Gentleman belonged; and in
the other alternative, it was a libel upon the agricultural
constituencies.—(Haar.) He did not believe that be-
cause their opinions with regard to protection were not
suffered to prevail—because the House had adopted
views opposed to the electors for the counties, that they
would send men inclined to vote for measures which
would be considered dangerous to the institutions of the
country. He was confirmed in that opinion by seeing a
statement made by a Noble Lord, from whom he gene-
rally differed, but for whom he entertained the highest
regard and respect—he meant the Duke of Richmond.
At a public meeting, at which the Noble Duke presided,
one of the speakers having stated that the farmers would
bo no longer loyal and support the institutions of the
country, the Noble Duke immediately interrupted
him with great indignation, and appealed to the
meeting whether it was not true that there would
be no change in the 1)3 salty of the farmers ;
and ho (L Ord John Russell) was not sur-
prised to find the t he had been supported
by the cheers of the greet majority
of the meeting. The
Hon. Gentleman had taken the trouble to repeat the oft-
reputed fallacies of free tra,le, and had again askA that
the farmere should be allowed to grow tobacco on the
principle of free trade in all things. So far as the ques-
tion went at present, it was, whether the farmer would be
able to compete with foreign-grown tobacco with or with-
out a duty? He contended that in neither case would
the English cultivator be able to compete successfully
with the foreign grower. Another grievance that had
been urged by him, and no doubt it was trae, W 33, that
the farmer was not allowed to moisten and dry his own
barley, and that the malt tax iuterfered with him. Here
again then there was no question of free trade, because
there was no foreign malt admitted free cf duty. The
quettlon was one merely relating to the taxation of the
country. That taxation had been considerably increased
by wars, and they had 21,000,000/. of interest per an
num imposed upon the country in consequenee of Lae
French and American wars. He did not know what
the H. n. Member for Wrest Surrey thought of
these ware. Ho (Lord John Russell) was
one of those who thought they had been unwisely un-
der-taker, but, whether wisely or unwisely, the debts
hear.) The Hon.
Gentlemen had asked when did cheapness cease to be a
had been contracted, and they could not get rid of them
—they must be honestly paid.—(dear'
blessing, because, in the course of, the debate in that
House, some Hon. Get.tlemaa had given an opinion that
prices e ere likely to rise. All the errors upon that point
had arisen from a sentence in Adam Smith, which said

-- -- - --...-- ... -
that nations pursuing their true interests acted just 171:e
individuals—they
sold in the dearest and bought in the
cheapest markets. What ho (Lord J. litirre:l) under-
stood from that was, teat nations pursued their own in-
terests just. as individuals did; but the nation was not
compelled by law to buy in the cheapest market and sell
in the dearest. If parties wished to buy a dear article
in preference to a cheap one, why not? WhatheLegisla-
ture was concerned in was, to tske care that they should
not make dear what could be had cheap. He con-
tended that it was not right in a nation or a legislature
to impose taxes to matte articles manufactured by one
particular class dear—to injure the consumer at the ex-
pense of the producer. What the Government
wished was merely to see the people procuring
the necessaries of life at the cheapest possible rate.
It was naturally to be expected that if there was an
extraordinary produce at home and abroad, prices would
be low—and the existing cheapness might he supposed
to arise fromparticular circumstances, and that prices
would rise. Just as if they were very high oae year,
they might naturally expect a greater produce next year
and a change in price. The principle of their legislation
was not to interfere in that case one way or another. If
that were so, then there was no truth whatever in the
assertion that they had only a 00e-sided system of free
trade. It could not Le pretended that that House was
bound to abandon or do away with taxes for the purpose
of revenue. Lest their taxes be laid on not to favour one
class at the expense el another—let them not have two
sorts of taxes—one class paid for the benefit of the state,
and the other paid into the pocket; of individuals or a
class f ar their exclusive benefit. In that point of view
the observations of the Hon. `[ember for West Surrey
were r cry inconsistent with his argument, because, as
they had been engaged in expessive wars, and had in-
curred heavy debts and liabilities requirin,a, a large
amount of taxation to defray, let them not add to that
taxation by having another seeks of t tx3s imposed,
which would not go into the laxchequer, but would go
into the pockets of individuals, and for the benefit of cue
a classagainstanotaer. For trese reasons and others
that heal been urge 1 by the Rght Hon. Gentleman the
Secretary at War, he could rot assent to the motion of
the Hots. Member for West Ssrrey, but would vote for
the previeus question.—([lest, hear.)
Lord J. MANNERS said le did not intend, nor was
it necessary to review the (pinions expressed by the

Noble Lord, for he concludes by practically admiteng
all that the Honourable Gentleman the Member for West
Surrey had contended for. The Noble Lord !aid, that
in removing taxation they ought to to ke care that they
did not prejudice one class for the benefit of' another. 1
That was the principle which he thought admitted of a
clear application to the case of the farmers of England.
Because, in the year 1850, now that the nee system of
commercial policy had been fur some time acted upon, if
the representations were true which the Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth had that evening
made to the House, that the farmers were in a mete
flourishing condition than they had been fur many years
past, how was it that they had adopted the course of
presenting numerous petitions.to Parliament from carious
channels, the object of which was to procure the repeal
Of some of the taxation which they were subjected to?
People of all classes were saying that they were over-
burdened with the amount of taxation, and the answer
was that taxation had been reduced as far as it was pos-
sible to reduce it.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable
Member for Northamptonshire had certainly sta:o
that his constituency were tolerably well off, but he had
not heard from any Honourable Gentleman con-
nected with the manufacturing districts how things
were going on there. Did any Hon. Gentleman con-
nected with Manchester know that the people of the
United States, at no very distant day, would be clothed
with articles of American manufacture ? But it was
now to China that they were to look for the security of
their manufacturing system. The circular of the ele3sre.
Littledale, of Liverpool, showed plainly enongh that all
the trade likely to take place between England and
China would probably ke endangered by a variety of
circumstances, and that there was a gre It depression
amongst the country dealers, which depressed trade ex-
cessively. The time, in short, was fast approaching
when the cry of distress, now so great, would still be
greater. The charge of inconsistency brought against
those who opposed the motion for a reduction of the
army and those who would support the present motion
was unfounded. But how was this motion put ? By
the evasion of the previous question. Though they
might meet it in that way, they might depend upon it
it would revert again and ag item. It was not for them
t 3 decide when the reduction should be made, but
they maintained that in the present state of the country
the existing amount of taxation could not with justice be
maintained, and for the reasons he had assigned be
would vote for the motian of the Member fir West
Surrey, as a protest against the unjust system of taxa-
tion which pressed so severely upon the country.
Mr. BRIGHT said that if he were a man guided by
what was called authority, he should be somewhat puz-
zled which way to vote on the present occasion, for emi-
nent authorities had been ruling both ways with equal
emphasis. He had, however, read the resolution before
them with the greatest attention, and with reference
solely to its intrinsic claims, and he was most anxious
that the House should net lose sight of the real nature
of that resolution, or be deterred from voting for it be-
cause it had been supported by some injudicious friends,
and by some untenable arguments. The resolution was
but half the resolution which the lion. Gentleman pro-
posed last year, and was all the milder in consequence.
The proposition was, that although the Government had
this year, to a certain extent, lessened the expenditure,
they had not lessened it so much as they might have
done, and as the circumstances of the country required.
He (Mr. Bright) being entirely of thet opinion, should
vote for the resolution. It was always an easy mat-
ter to find fault with what we did not like, and
eccordingly the Gentlemen on the Treasury bench ob-
jected to the resolution as vague. As a practical
illustration of his distaste for the vague, the Right
Honourable Gentleman had met this vague motion by
moving that vaguest of all amendments tho pre-
vious question, a proceeding certainly open to the chage
of inconsistency, of which so much use had been made,
but involving this important admission on the part of
the Government, that they did not deny the truth of the
propoeitioe which, as inconvenient, they desired to get
rid of.—(dear, hear.) If the House thought that the
taxation of the country was not too much, the House
would of course reject the motion: if the Howe, agree-
ing with its constituency, was more and more in favour
(of economy,it would reject the subterfuge amendment.—
Hear, hear.) The Right lion. Gentleman had himself
afforded the very strongest argument in favour cf the
former course. The Right Honourable Gentleman, el-
k:ding to the similar resolution of last year,—" Whereas
a greater amount of taxation is levied from the people
than is required for the good and efficient Government
of the United Kingdom; and whereas, large sums are
expended 3 early in supporting needless places, extrava-
gant salaries, and unnecessary works and establish-
ments,"—then, es in the resolution now bef re
the Mouse, the Right Honourable Gentleman, in
reference to the resolution of last year, dis-
tinctly stated that the resolution having teen
adopted by the House, against an amendment of the
Noble Member for Middlesex, the Government had
accepted i', and had, in consequence of that resolutior,
sent a circular to all the public departments, reciting
the resolution, and requiring that in each the most
rigid economy should be set on toot.—(Hear, hear.) If,
then, the resolution of last year, no doubt equally de-
nounced by Government at the time as vague and need-
less, Lad produced so salutary an effect, visible in the
reductions in this year's estimates, it was a most fair
argument that, adopt the present resolution, and the
Government—a Government he fully believed honestly
disposed to carry economy much :further than they
had hitherto been able to carry it—would avail them-
selves of it as a Parramentary encouragement to reduce
the estimates still further next year, and as a source of
strength for them against the pernicious influences, un-
seen by the public and the House, which impeded their
onward progress in the direction of economic reform. The
Right Hon. Member for Tamworth had referred to the large
majorities in savour of the 12,000,000 e or 13,000,0001. of
army and navy expenditure, and there might be some-
thing in what he said as regarded the majorities, but, at
all events, it had nothing to do with the minorities, who
were manifestly bound, in common consistency, to vote
for this resolution.—(Hear.) It was certain, however,
that sense of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite, who had voted
against the Hon. Member for the West Riding and the
Hon. Member for Montrose, were now in a very awk-
ward predicament, thoroughly subjecting themselves to
the sarcasms which the Right Hon. Baronet, to whom
they showed no mercy, had directed against them.—
(Rear,) Ho would advise those gentlemen to get out of
their predicament by adopting some definite conclusion;
he would advise them to be distinctly either for economy
or for the other thing.—(llear, hear.) He made no ot-
jeation to their calling for economy because the corn-
lass s had been abolished; it was natural enough for the
representatives of the agricultural interest, a large For-
do:lt of whom indisputably were no longer in the pros-
per els condition of some former years, to be stimulated
by that very fact more closely to investigate questions of
finance and expenditure, and to require from the Govern-
ment the utmost possible economy. The Ilon. M ether
for Oxford had warned the House that the succrss of this
resolution would be trumpeted filth as a Protectionist
triumph over free-trade principles. Ho was the last man
in the House to desire a triumph for protection over free
trede, and he would incidentally remark that the state-
ments of the Noble Member far Colchester, as to the
effect of f. co trade on the manufactures of Bradford
end Manchester, would be utterly repudiated by those
manufacturers—Meer, hear)—but protection was gone,
never, the believei, to return—certainly not in these
days—and he was anxious they should not be for ever
quarrelling about a point that was settled. Let them
:rather join fur an object which all, Free-traders and Pro-
tectionists, seemed to consider essential to the country;
let them combine, not to destroy the institutions of the
country—not to reduce the defences below the point
which wes really deemed necestaty—but to cut down,
with a steady aid unsparing hand, the excrescences of
expenditure which the Government itself, y ar after
year, practically admitted to be such, by diminishing
them to the extent of hundreds of thousands of pounde.
—(bear.) The Government need not think this motion
hostile to them ; tee effect of the similar motion last
year, so far from being hostile to then, had been most
neneficial, by enabling them to carry out to a much
greater extent the economy which he honestly believed
eiseco to tte honestly ctesiroms or accomplishing.—(liear,
hear.) Believing, then, that this resolution would sti-
mulate and strengthen the Government, as that f last
year had stimulated and strengthened them, believing
chat no Fame Minister could have any interest in un-
necessary and wasteful expenditure, and that the present
Prime Minister desired all such expenditure to he abo-
lished, he should, as a friend cf the Government—but,
if need were, still more as a friend to economy—support
the motion.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HENLEY saw no inconsistency in voting fir this
motion after voting against the motions of the Hon.
Members for the West Riding and Montrose. The casts
sire quite different. Hon. Gentlemen might very well
be indisposed to decide upon a paeticular number of men
or upon a particular expenditure, and yet be very anxi-
ous to lay down a general principle of economy. Ile
eves much amused with the manner in which the Right
lion. Member for Tamworth bad given the go.bye to
the, malt tax, but the Right Hon. Gentleman might
rely upon it that this was a question in which the
veearrn
.)
Ima
tgerwui cta,us
at all events, did not deny the principle of the re-
l satisfactoryt
,ti
ar is t took
to re
findre, great
tha
that
interestthis year
eianrd etehde.
solution now proposel. The Noble Lord at the head of
the Government, after giving the Rouse a little reading
from Adam Smith, and explaining the often-disputed
question
as to the meaning of buying in the cheapest
market and selling in the dearest, had said that he
thought that there was a great advantage in high prices
when they rose in a natural way. He (Mr. Henley) sup-
; posed, then, that the Noble Lord thought the high prices
of 1847 a great benefit to the country.--(Hear, hear.)
He bad heard no single argument advanced against the
motion, for although it had been said that it was
inconvenient and meant nothing, no one had ventured
to deny that the necessities of the country required the
strictest economy that could safely be exercised. The
Hor. Member for Guildford indeed had seemed to
doubt whether there was any distress among the :seri-
. cultural body, but he thought the Honourable Gentle-
man was singular in that opinion.—(Hear, hear.) They
certainly had not aeon the fulfilment of the prophecies
of prosperity which were held out when a change
was made in their commercial policy; acid there was
now, unquestior ably, from one end of the country
to the other, an universal cry that taxes could not
be borne.—(Hear, hear.) He was the last man in the
House, to ray anything that could operate against public
credit, but when the cry of distress was so universal, he
could not shut his eyes to the fact that every institution
of the country was, to a certain extent, in danger. He
had regretted to hear the Secretary-et-War state that no
remission of taxation that he was aware cf could give
relief to the people.
Mr. F. MAULE denied that he had made any such
atateme ,t. Ha had said that be saw in the resolution
of the Hon. Member for West Surrey no remission of
taxation proposed that could give relief te the people.
Mr. HENLEY continued—lt came to this, ther, that
no pressure which such a motion could put upon the Go-
vernment was likely to , produce such a remission cf

tsxatiou as would give relief to the country. He re-
gretted to hear the sl:4temcnt of the Right Hen. G:ntl, -
man, because many vi:rsons were n,7::tious that the :cc- nt
change in our commercial policy should have a fair trial,
but they were atisfied it could not have a fair trial
s the burdens now pre!t sing upon the people were re-
moved or lightened. Ile would give his cordial support
to the motion, and he was confident that, if it were
carried, its (Tract would be to press down the public ex-
penditure.

Mr. HEYWORTH said they ought to reduce the
burdens on the country. Land was a manufacture fir
the production if food, which should be free from bur-
dens like any other manufacture. He would transfer
the burden to property. It they did not except land,
ho would join them in placing the difference that would
ari.:e upon property. The Member for Tamworth had
made a speech for which the country was indebted to
him, and which would never die in the memory of those
who heard it. He should vote for the resolution.
Mr. IIUME egret d with the Hon. Member that taxa-
tion ought to be placed upon property. There was no
singularity in the Hon. Member—tnu Member for Oxford-
shire, Mr. Henley—stating that the ceuutry now cried out
for a reduction of caxa•ion; but formerly, when the country
was crying out for a reduction of its burdens, there was not
one Hon Gentleman on teat side of the House who said
one word about distress, and the bureens which the Hon.
Member now admit:ed to be general, were repudiated.
There was a cry of inconsistency raised with respect to
Hon. Member:. who might be disposed to vote for this
motion, but he (Mr. Hume) would not fall in with it.
He cared not from what qua-ter it came—whether Tory
Whig, or Radical, he was ready to support the principle.
--(Hoar.) What was the motion before the House ?
It was a necessity for a reduction of taxation.—
(Hear, hear.) From 1792 up to the present time,
the increase that took place in the salaries under
Government were almost incredible, and it was said
thet those increases were owing to high prices of food;
but what he (Mr. Hume) would do now that the price of
food was brought down by the legislative changes which
had t lien place, would be to fall back to the salaries cf
1792. On the 26th of July, 1821, the House had come
to a determination that there should be a reduction of all
salaries, and that the cost of the army and navy should
be reduced t ) the standard of 1797, and the following
year showed a reduction of 3,000,0001., a considerable
reduction of the navy and all other branches having
taken place. He had no doubt if the House would set to
work honestly on the subject, the country would derive
great benefit from its resolution. The present civil list
was the one settled in George the Fourth's time, and let
any Hon. Member compare the prices at that time with
those of the present, and ask himself ought the prefect
expensive scale b ) kept up? He (Mr. Hume) felt that
it ought not; and he therefore hoped that this resolu-
tion would be carried. He would advise the Govern-
ment to settle the question now, convinced that the
ieterests of the country required a settlement cf it.
He would be prepared, before any Committee, to prove
that they could reduce the expenditure 10,000,0001, and
if they would take the establishment of 1797, and ap-
proximate to that, he had no hesitation in saying they
would bring down the expenditure from 50,000,000/.
to 40,000,0001. sterling.--(Herr, hear.) The Right
lion. 13aronet the Member for Temworth, during the
time he was recently in charge of the Government, re-
duced the expenditure cf the navy 1,000,0001. sterling;
acid, if the present Government would go on in that way,
he (Mr. Hume) believed they would render the country
the greatest service. In 1833, he (Mr. Hume), was mem-
her of a Committee, when they bad 430 generals, and
since that time there had teen 153 additional generals
made. He wished that Hon. Members would lay aside
the prejudices of their politics, and disabuse the minds of
farmere, by telling them they conld not have high prices
now. By that course they would place the landed pro-
prietors upon a safer footing, and it was on those gronds,
and in that spirit, that he should support the motion of
the Hon. Member.

Mr. PHILIP BENNET thought, from the remarks
which he had heard fall tbat night from Sir Rubert Peel,
that the Right Hon, Baronet would not only support
this motion, but that he would become a member c f the
" Peace Socioty."—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) He was
sorry, however, for the conclusion to which the Right
Hon. Baronet had arrived. Ile had that morning re•
ceivod information from the agricultural districts of
Suffolk, which showsd a state of the grta'e it distress
in those district•, and an amount of discontent which
would require the aid cf the police to keep in check. He
thought, lookiog at the causes which led to that state of
things, and at the condition of the suffering classes, that
a system of the greatest economy aas necessary, and in
that conviction he felt it to be his duty to support the
motion now before the House.

Mr. OSBORNE said that, rerreFenting as he did such
an enormous constituency, he did not wish to go to a
division without explaining the grounds on which he
had voted. He had not had the advantage of hearing
the speech of the Hon. Member for Manchester, but he
had heard the speeches of the Hon. Mover and of the
llon. Memter for the North Riding (Mr. Cayley), and
the result which he had arrived at was, that Hon. Gent!'
men opposite, who had been always opposed to economy,
or who invariably absented thenotelves when motions for
retrenchment were brought forward, were now endea-
vouring to make a cat's-paw of Members on that (the
Ministerial) side of the House, in order to endanger the
policy that had been introduced by the Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth.—(Hear, hear.) For
his part, ho was determined to give no vote that would
endanger that policy, and he declined becoming a cat's-
paw in the hands of the Hon. Member for West Surrey.
—(A laugh.) If the motion was intended to mean any-
thing, it was to be a reversal of the policy of free-!rade;
but ho should not take up the time of the House by going
into that subject at present. He was ready to vote in
favour of every motion for a reduction in the army, the
navy, or the ordnance that the Honourable Gentleman
opposite might bring forward, but he could not give a
fallacious vote at their bidding, the object of which was
to endanger that policy which he believed to be of essen-
tial service to this country.—(Hear, hear.)
Captain HARRIS believed that it was necessary to
keep up the establishments of a great empire like this
on a most efficient scale; but he must agree with the
Hon. Membcr for West Surrey, that a revision of the
taxation of the country was necessary, and in that revi-
sion the malt and hop duties should form most promi-
nent feature,, The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for
Tamworth had carried a great legislative change in the
policy of this country; but he (Captain Harris)
believed that the Right llonourable Baronet
was now satisfied that he was rot legislating
fir the whole country. He (Captain Barris) hello-
ing that an adjustment of the burdens of the country was
necessary, should vote for the motion of the Hon. Mem-
ber for West Surrey.

Mr. LABOUCHERE would not detain the Hcuse

long, but if time and opportunity permitted him to go
into the speeches of Hop. Members in support cf this
motion, he thought he would bo enabled to convince the
House of their fallacy. The Hon. Gentleman who had
just sat down had said that ho would vote for any Inc-
Von that would enable them to remit any con-
siderable reduction of taxation ; but the Hon.
Gentleman said that the object of his giving his
vote fur this measure was, to reverse the policy
which had been recently adopttd. He contemplated
a duty on corn of The re :sons which he (Mr. La-
bouchere) should advance to the House, with a view of
inducing it not to agree ti the motion cf the Hon.
Member, would be altogether on different grounds. He
thought the Government had given practical proof that
they were disposed to redu::e all unnecessary expenditure
and excessiue taxation, and it WAS the intention of the
Government, as it was the duty cf that House, to reduce,
as they could such expenditure and taxation. He 1)2-
lieved that in the Government establishments in the
year—the three great branches of the service—the nrmy,
navy, and ordnance—the amount of reduction effected
was not less than 730,600/., :tad, as compared with the
year before, not less than 1,000,000/. sterling. He was
aware that it was the duty of this House to take care
that every economy should be carried into effect as far
as could be consistently with the efficiency of the service,
and ho felt that it wm. alto duty of oho House to take
cure cn3t the public money should Le expended with
the greatest possible economy ; and seeing that
the Government wa3 acting in that spirit, he
thought it was most unfair, most unjubt, and
most ungrateful, to put the Government in a
situation in which they must feel emharrassment
night after night. Ho had a right to say that the
conduct of the Government did not justify any such
course.—(Gent', hear.) He felt that the evil conse-
quences which would result from such a course would
be fur greater thu.ti any annoyance that could be given

to the Government. Lie believed there never was a
time when it was of greeter importance that the credit
of this country should bo held high than the present.
He believed, with the lion. Gentleman who brought
forward this motion, that great distress prevailed in the
country; but he felt that many of the statements which
had been made that night had Leen male without any
foundation, and that they were celculate d to do the
greatest injury.—(Hear, hear, and loud cries of " Time,
time.") He Rould not detain the Hen e hut
for a very f minute'e. He thought that every indica-
tion cf ecoeoasy had been given by the Government, tied
he hoped that Hon. Members would not embarrass the
Government, but allow the estimates to be gone on with.
One word only before he sat down. lie had heard with
the delight which the whole House had the very able
speech of the Right lion. Baronet the Member for Tam-
worth—(Hear)—und he quite agreed with the Right
Hon. Baronet that the strength of this country must de-
pend not on overgrown estahlishmentf, bat on es-
teblishmenti suited to the wants of the empire; and he
agreed with him that it was not wise to push to an ex-
treme the care of our possessions, but he thought that
Hun. Gentlemen misunderstood the Right lion. Baronet
when they supposed him to infer that they should _ aban-
den their possession of those colonies. his (Mr. Labou-
ehere'e) opinion of the Right Hon. Baronet's stat,ment
with regard to the colonies was that the Government of
this country should be al xays in a position to afford to
them in t::ne of danger the defence which they might
stand in need ef, and as long as the British empire hung
together this country could not escape from the discharge
of that duty.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.)
Sir BOBER f PEEL said he was net aware until he
bad heard the statement cf the Right Honourable Gen-
tleman the President of the Board of Trade, that so
extraordinary a construction had been put upon the
remarks he made relative t' the maintenance of our
garrisons. No man would ba more prepared than
himself to make vigorous exertions in defending
the British empire, whenever it was in danger.
What he said war, that with respect to so many garri-
sons in a time of profound peace being kept in a state of
p rf.ct efficiency, would be impossible, without entailing
an cverwhelmieg expense, and that rather than ado! t
such a course, he would prefer trusting to the natural
exertions of the British empire to defend any portion of
it, whenever danger arose.

Mr. MU.NlZsaid, that after the statement if the
Right Honourable the Sceretary of War, there was no
alternative leit him but to support the motion of the

1-1:7:1!
ttOT.?l'‘A
;rese-r7
Honourable Member for West Surrey. The ipket--.1,s
Henourehle Geutisman had informed the. flout tyvit- ssel",4
the moth n of the Honourable Member last sessio •
induced the Government t ) retrench t 3 a considerable
extent in various public offices. With such an admis-
sion soaring him in the face, how could he avoid giving
his support to the motion, in the hope, and with the ex-
pectation, that further economic practices would be
pursuel. Before the motion was submitt.al, the Go-
vernment came down and asked for an income-tax, on
the ground that the expenditure would rot exceed the
revenue ; but after his motion, they not only ma,:e
the expenditure meet the revenue, but actually re-
duced. Taxation was intolerable, and it was quite clear
that something should be done to take the pressure off
ineustry.
Mr. BROTHERTON said, if he thought the motion
were calculated to reduce taxation for the benefit of the
community, he should certainly support it; but believing
it to be a trap into which the Honourable Member for
Birmingham bad fallen, and looking at the intent and
me acting of those who proposed and supported it, he
should vote with the Government against the propo-
sition.—(lronical cheers.)
Lord DUNCAN said if the motion was a trap, it had
caught him as well as the Hon. Member for Birming-
ham. He not only saw nothing objectionable in it, but
something that he was prepared to support. He be-
lieved that it was brought forward with an honest in-
tention by the Hon. Member for West Surrey, and all
he hoped and expected in return for his vote was that
when he (Lord Duncan) brought forward his motion for
repealing the taxes on light and air, Hon. Gentlemen
opposite, acting on similar principles, would afford him
the same support.
Mr. DRUMMOND replied. lie felt neither indig-
ation nor contempt towards those who called this a dis-
honest motion; such charges were altogether unworthy
of notice.—(Heat, hear.) But he would tell them what
motions were " sham motions"—they were those motions
that everybody knew would not press the Government.
—(Hear.) Certainly, however amusing might bo the
discrepancies strung together in this motion, the discre-
pancies by which this motion had been opposed were not
less amusing. One Hon. Gentleman said it was a mere
truism. "So powerful was it," said the Secretary at
War, " that the Government had acted upon it last
year"—(Cheers)—and another Hon. Gentleman said he
would not vote for it because he would not be made a
cat's paw.—(Laughter.) It appeared be had been mis-
understood when he dealt with the taxes that pressed pe-
culiarly on the labourer and the small farmer. He thought
he had been explicit enough, for betook tobacco and hops,
and various other things, as illustrations of articles the
cultivation of which ought not to be interfered with by
the Government. An Hon. Member had asked what ad-
vantage the people of Paisley would gain by the repeal
of the malt tax. It was true that what they drank was
not ale, but whisky; but it might as well be said that,
as they did not live upon wheaten bread, but on Scotch
porridge and oat cake, of what benefit to them
was the opening of the ports to foreign wheatr—
(Laughter.) The Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Man-
gles) had contradicted one of his (Mr. Drummond's)
statements, but he happened to receive a petition from
the people of Guildford that day, from which the House
would be able to judge which of the statements was most
accordant with the fact. (The Hon. Gentleman here
read an extract from the petition to the effect that the
petitioners, believing there was no probability of a return
to protection, considered the duty on malt, hops, and
bricks most inconsistent in principle, and unfair and in-
jurious to the farmer, and prayed for their total repeal,
and far liberty to the farmer to grow any root whatso-
ever on his land. They also prayed, as the prices of all
needfal commodities were considerably reduced, that all
public salaries and pensions should be reduced in a cor-
responding degree.)—(Chcers.) " Believing there was
no probability of a return to protection "—this was the
language of men who, they were always told, would
listen to nothing but getting back a ss. duty on corn.—
(Hear.) The Honourable Gentleman's (Mr. Maegles)
nearest neighbour—than whom a more respectable man
did not exist—called bis labourers together lately and
told them, " My good fellows, I'm not able to pay you
for your labour as I have done. Two courses are open
to me—l will either keep you all on at reduced wages,
or I must tarn off some of you altogether." The men
took a day to consider of it, and they all agreed to
work for him at reduced wages.—(Hear, hear.)
He was surprised to hear Honourable Gentlemen talk as
they had dune about his making light of the public
credit. What he said was, that they had not kept lath
with the public deb:or—(llear, hear)—and, therefore,
it was those Honourable Gentlemen, and not him, who
had taught the country to hold the public creditor so
very cheaply. He had several times said he would
rather vote tor a higher property-tax than endanger the
rights of the public creditor. Whenever he heard Hon.
Gentlemen ta'k as they bad done on this subject, it
always forcibly reminded him of La Fontaine's fable.
The public debtor was like the poor animals which the
lion was told it had done too great an honour to by
cracking their bones; but the public creditor, like the
jackass of the fable— (Laughter)—as soon as it saw it
was about to be interfered with, exclaimed, " Comment!
vous ne mangeriez point le foin d'autrui."—(Renewed
laughter.) He had repeatedly warned the House of the
peril arising from the doctrines of repudiation that
were growing up in the country; and the fast was, our
whole system of legislation had produced a most vicious
state of things, enabling a few greedy capitalists to
realise colossal fortunes amidst a starving people.
And a remarkable proof of this was, that when Mr.
Pitt was enacting the legacy duty, he thought it
absurd to establish a legacy duty for the case of the
millionaire, as it was then supposed to be utterly impos-
sible that such enormous fortunes could be amassed by
particular individuals. In conclusion, he maintained that
this was no sham or covert motion; it was plain and in-
telligible; and therefore he looked for the support cf. the
House upon it.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For patting Mr. Drummond's motion 156
Against putting it ... ... 190
_ _

Majority

-34

Mr. Drummond'a Motion was accordingly lost.
RELIEF OF OCCUPIERS NOT OWNERS OF LAND
FROM COUNTY AND POLICE RATES.
S:r HENRY lIALFORD moved for leave to bring in
a Bill to relieve the occupiers of lands and tenements, not
being owners taereof, from the payment of county rates
and county police rates.
Mr. PACKE seconded the motion.
Mr. W. MILES declared that the prop-sition came
upon him unawares, and called attention to some diffi-
culties Chet might arise in the operation of the Act, but
did not oppose the introduction of tko Bill.
Sir. GEORGE GREY would not object to the intro-
duction of the Bill. The effect of it would be to sepa-
rate the poor rate from the county rate, but he would not
then give any opinion on it.
After a few words from Mr. AGLIONBY and Mr.
PACKE, the motion was agreed to.
ADMISSION OF JEWS TO PARLAMENT.
Mr. PAGE WOOD, in btinging fore a-d the motion
of which ho had given notice, would not detain the House
at any length. The matter which had gi en rise to it
was notorious, and it was unnecessary fur him to enter
into any detail on the subject. The House was aware
that the city of London had returned to Parliament,
when it first met, a gentleman who was unable to take
his scat in that House in consequence of certain oaths
which were necessary, or which were supposed to be ne-
cessary, to be taken by Members at the table before tak-
ing a seat in that House. That gentleman afterwards,
in consequence of a Bill introduced and passed through
tl.e House by a considerable majority being rejected in
another place, resigned his seat, and the same gentle-
man was again returned by a large majority
of the electors of the city of Londoe.—(Hear.)
As one of those electors, and having been called upon
by several others of that great body (under other
circumstances it would be great presumption on his part
to do so), he had taken upon himself to submit this
motion to the House with a view to have a full inquiry
into al! the circumstances which might be requiette for
the purposes of tee House arriving at a conclusion on
the subject.—(th ar, hear.) It was a matter which it
wai quite impossible to withhold from the considera-
tion of the House for any lengthaled period. Nobody
could suppose that a gentleman, who was twice twurned
by such an important constituency as that of the city of
London, and who hitherto, for reasons so well known,
had been unable to take his seat in the House, would be
permitted to remain in that situation without a decision
being come to one way or the other with reference to
his position.—(Hear.) It was not for him (Mr. Page
Wood) to prejudge the question, his object merely was
to have a Committee of Inquiry appointoi, and he rested
his proposition on a precedent he had found in the jour-
nals, with reference to the case of Mr. Pease, when he
claimed a seat in tl at House on making an affirmation,
int.teed of taking the oaths in the form prescribed by
the latest Act of Parliament on the subject—the 81k
Geo. 111. Upon that occasion Mr. Pease was not al-
lowed to take the affirmation until a full inquiry was made
on the subject; and he would precisely adopt the course
then taken, making only such changes in the form of
the motion as the peculiar circumstances of this case
rendered necessary. The form of the motion in Mr.
Pease's case war, that a Select Committee should be ap-
pointed to search the journals cf the House, and to re-
port such precedents and such Acts or parts of Acts of
Parliamei t, in relation to the persons called Quakers
taking their seats, and making a solemn affirmation where
oaths ought to be taken. Tee motion he had to present
to the House wis the same, substituting the word Jews
for Quakers. He proposed to move for a " Select Com-
mittee to search the journals of this House, and to re-
port such precedents and such Acts, or parts of Acts of
Parliament, as relate to the question of Jews or other
persons being admitted to take their seats in Parliament
without being sworn upon the Holy Gospels; and, fur-
ther, to inquire and report in what manner Joseph
Pease, Eeq., on taking his seat in this House, in the
year 1333, made affirmation to the effect cf the oaths
required by law to be taken by Members before taking
their seats in this House; and also to inquire and 11)-
1 port in wha! manner Jews and other persons not prc-
fessing the Christian religion nra permitted to make
oaths in courts of justice and other places where
an oath is allowed, authoriEed, or required to be taken."
He believed those inquiries would produce important in-
formation to assist and and guide the House in arriving
at a determina,ion as to the steps to be taken with re-
gard to the peculiar situation of the city cf London at the
pi ()ran moment.—(Hear, hear.) It there could be
unanimity in the question between both Houses of Par-
liament, to remove all doubt, that would be the proper
course to be taken, but at the same time he felt it was
of great importance that the privileges of the House, of
which they had been at all times so tenacious, should
not be heedlessly invaletl.—(Hear, hear.) He thought
it would be quite impossible to assume that there was
n o intention of Winging forward any Bill for the pur-
pose of at Wing this question. No one could suppose
that the whole matter of the election of Baron Roths-
child for the city of London should be determined
without inquiry, or should be excluded from the House,
Or allowed to remain in his present position, or that the