The Sun.
London, England, 1850-02-27 00:00:00

comfort and to the health of the hitherto-neglected
poor and working classes. With that view a board of
health had been appointed to remove every nuisance
affecting the health of the community. Local Acts were
also passed for the purpose of attaining this desirable
object. As, fur example, an Act was passed for Liver-
pool
to prevent the occupation of apartments below
the surface of the ground. They had re-
ceived reports from every part of the country
as to the manner in which the working people were
lodged. These went to show that the most valuable
portion of the community—the labouring classes—upon
whom, after all, the prosperity of the country depended,
had been neglected in a great degree by the Govern-
ment, who had the direction of everything that affected
their health and comfort. The expense of building cot-
tages was so great as seriously to endanger the moral
and social condition of the people. He had visited
within the last two months many of the cottages of the
labouring classes, and be found in some of them families
of eleven and twelve children brought up without any
separation so reeeesary far the promotion ef decency
and morality. Speaking generally, he was informed
that there was a duty of ten per cent. levied upon the
value of hrieks. When they looked at tl; e dwellings of
the poor they could scarcely blame the father of the fi-
rmly for withdrawing from it occasionally to seek for
ereater comfort, which was afforded him in the public-
house. Ile was thus induced to spend his money upon
intoxicating drinks, leaving his family destitute and
unhappy. There were from 26,000,000 to 30,000,000
gallons of ardent spirits consumed by the popula-
tion. This enormous consumption could only be ac-
counted for by the fact that there was no inducement
to the working man to remain at home, for he had no
comfort or enjoyment at his own fireside. The poverty
and uncomfortable state of his hou-e tended to alienate
the man from his abode, and to leave his family desti-
tute. At the early part of the session he put in a word
for these classes. It was well known that many poor
men who earned but 9s. or 10t. a week could not afford
to pay more for their lodging than Is. a week. It was
also well known that one of their little cottages could not
be built for 501. or 60L He wished the duty to be re-
moved from bricks altogether. He was satisfied that if
this duty were removed the benefit would not be con-
fined to the poorer classes; the advantages would be
felt by all classes. By the return which he held in his
hand it would appear that the amount of duty received
for the last ten years from bricks was, on an average,
481,3181. a year from England, and 13,4401. from Scot-
land. He did not wish to limit his observations altogether
to bricks, for it was of equal importance to the health
and comfort of the people that the window duty should
be removed; and he was sorry that his Noble Friend
(Lord Duncan) had not had an opportunity of bringing
forward the question that night. The Government,
in their endeavours to carry out their sanitary mea-
sures, ought to see that these duties upon windows
and bricks were calculated to thwart and stop that
progress that they would otherwise make in the im-
provement of the health and condition of the people.
Looking at the low wages, and the want of comforts
among the working-classes, he was astonished they were
able to manage as well as they did. The removal of
this and other taxes would add greatly to their comforts.
On this ground he hoped the House would express its
opinion in favour of his motion.
Upon the question being put,
Mr. LABOUCHERE said, the Hon. Gentleman had
frankly stated what was the intention of this motion—
namely, to elicit the opinion of the House as to the duty
on bricks; and that the duty on timber was, to use his
metaphor, in the same boat. Now it was deemed right
not to pledge the House to any particular remission un-
til they had heard the financial statement of his Right
Hon. Friend. But if the House were not of that
opinion, he said he would oppose the motion on the
terms in which his Hon. Friend had stated in his mo-
tion. Who was to define what cottages cost? He had
seen them built at great expense, and which certainly
could have no claims for exemption. He thought in a case
of this kind there ought not to be a drawback, because
if granted it would open the door to a great deal of
fraud. If there were, too, a drawback upon timber for
cottages, then they would be asked for a draw-
back upon timber used in ship-building and in mines.—
(Hear, hear.) Then he doubted very much the policy
of encouraging the building of a low class of cottage.
He mentioned these things to show what caution should
be used in cases of this description.—(Hear, hear.) As
to the remission of duties on bricks and timber, it would
be contrary to his duty on this occasion to express his
opinion. Until the announcement was made by his
Right Honourable Friend in his financial statement he
would not pronounce an opinion one way or another,
and he said it would be premature for the House to de-
clare its opinion as to a remission of taxation on any
particular matter. This motion was on its own merits
inexpedient, and ought not to be adopted; he, therefore,
opposed the motion.
Mr. DRUMMOND thought the conduct which it was
proper for a Minister of the Crown to pursue in such a
case a: this was not that which was most proper for a
Member of the House to adopt. When the financial
statement had beets made, then Ministers would say that
the case was then made up—that it was then too late to
listen to any other proposal.—(Hear.) He believed it
was not the intention of the House to do injustice to the
poorer classes—that when injustice was done it was be-
cause the House was not aware that it was doing injustice.
(Hear.) If the relief now asked for were granted, he
admitted that it would not be universally felt, because it
would be of no use in the northern and other parts
of the country, where there were abundance of mate-
rials for building; there were, however, other parts of
tie country, and especially those with which he was
best acquaint .d, on which this relief would confer a very
great beusfir. A gentleman anxious to build cottages
for the poor could not do so at a less expense than 1001.
each. In such places, a tradesman from a neighbouring
town could build the same sort of cottage, let it for 10/.,
and the occupier made the rent by letting the rooms to
whole families, and thus, while the gentry were endea-
vouring to give three rooms to each family, the plan was
destroyed by some adjeining tradesman. In consequence
of lessening the size of farms, he foresaw that there must
be a very great increase of farm buildings. Now, much
expense was caused in building by the high price of
bricks. The tax increased the price of bricks by two-
thirds. In some places the benefit would be very small,
in other cases it would be very great. He hoped in sup-
porting this motion there would be no sneer against him
and others of having ulterior nr.:tives, in voting for a
repeal of the tax, which they would vote for, because
they conceived it would be an essential relief to the
agriculturists. Now, he vot al for this, though he did
not vote with the Noble Lord against the window duty—
they must have houses—there was no use in windows
without houses.—(Laughter.) He would oppose the
remission of any tax which did not bear directly upon
the working classes. He said he did not want to em-
barrass the Government; but he said if they wanted
money, let them not take their taxes from the poverty of
the country.—(Hear.)
Mr. BET° supported the motion. He could point
out cases where 20 persons were found occupying two
rooms. He believed the remission of the duty on bricks
would put an end to this evil. Until it was at an end
there could be no classification of the poorer classes.
Lord C. HAMILTON was glad the Hon. Member for
Montrose had brought this subject before the House;
he only regretted he bud not brought it forward in a
more comprehensive manner. There was no question
that more materially affected the well-being of the work-
ing classes than this.
Mr. MITCHELL said, if the Hon. Member should
go to a division on this subject, he would support it. He
differed in the opinion that had been expressed on this
subject by the Right Hon, the Presideut of the Board of
Trade, that such motion should not be brought forward
until the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer
bad been made, and no proposal for a remission of tax-
ation submitted to the consideration of the House until
then. At the present moment a drawback was allowed
on all timber used in the erection of churches; and he
did not apprehend that, with a vigilant control, there
would be any danger cf fraud if a drawback were also
allowed upon bricks. Should the lion. Member for
Montrose again bring forward his motion, however, he
trusted that be would give the, House some idea how
fraud was to be avoided. Being of opinion that a good
case existed for a revision of this tax, he should sup-
port the motion of his Hon. Friend.
Mr. R. PALMER agreed with Lord C. Hamilton
upon the prudence of not pressiug this motion at this
moment. But he was strongly of opinion that it would
be exceedingly advantageous to repeal the duty upon
bricks altogether, and that such a measure would be
quite as useful as a repeal of the window-tax.—(Hear.)
It' the Hon. Member intended to confer a benefit upon
the owners and occupiers of small cottages, he would be
doing so to a much greater extent by proposing the total
repeal of the duty upon bricks than by this proposition
for allowing a drawback.
Mr. HEY WORTH supported the motion, and ob•
served that he thought this discussion would lead, ulti-
mately, into a general revision of the duty upon every
article that entered into the consumption of the people.
Mr. HUME, in reply, said that his object had been to
ascertain the opinion of the House, and it appeared that
that opinion was decidedly in favour of an entire and
total repeal of the duty.—(Hear, hear.) He was not
much in the habit of proposing half measures, and in
doing so in the present instance he must confess
hear.)
Thethat he
had signally tailed.—(Laughter and hear,
lion Gentleman then intimated that, with the leave of
the House, he would withdraw his motion.
Motion withdrawn accordingly.
MANAGEMENT OF RAILWAY TRAFFIC.
Mr. RICARDO moved for leave to bring in a Bill for
the better regulation of railway traffic. The H
on. Me-
mber briefly alluded to the numerousinconveniences
which were attendant upon the present system; the want
of uniformity of tolls—the danger incurred by the pas-
sengers in having to change carriages upon their journey
—the mariner in which the " points" were worked at the
junctions, and other evils and inconveniences; and said
that the object of his Bi4l was to provide an efficient
remedy with which lion. Members might make them-
selves acquainted immediately upon the Bill being
printed.—Leave given.
Viscount EMLIN moved f r leave to bring in a Bill
to amend the laws relating to highways in South Wales.
Mr. C. LEWIS admitted that there did exist certain
reasons why the highways in South Wales should be
under a separate system of management, and being of
that opinion ho would not oppose the motion of the
Noble Lord.—Leave given.
EXTRA-MURAL INTERMENTS.
Mr. LACY moved for leave to bring in a Bill for pro-
moting extra-mural interments. The lion. Gentleman
said he dared say some Hon. Members would be startle(,
at his project; but the proposition was simply to ow
railway companies, with the sanction of the Railway
Commissioners, to hold cemeteries. lie proposed that,
after having obtained the approbation of the share-
holders and the Commissioners, these companies should
be empowered to purchase a sufficient quantity of waste
land at a convenient distance, say twenty-five or thirty
miles, from the metropolis, and thereon construct a ce-
metery, lie yr as onTinced OM ;10 ciao general come-

FEBRUARY 27, 1860

Motion withdrawn.

Tho orders of the day were then read:—

FIRST DIVISION.

Lord Chancellor

MARQUISES.
Breadalbane
Clanricarde
Donegal

Devon
Grey
Granville
111nto
Strafford
Waldegrave
BARONS.
Ashburton
Campbell
Colborne
PAIRS.

EARLS.

Besborough
Carlisle
Charlemont
Craven

Lord De Freyne
Earl of Suffolk
Lord Milford
Marquis of Anglesey
Lord Dufferin

tery would be sufficient for the metropolis; and that by
giving the different companies this power, it would t e
for the public benefit, at the Fame time that the compa-
nies themselves would find it to be a good commercial
speculation.—( Laughter.)
Sir G. GREY had not very clearly collected the real
purport of the Bill of the Hon. Gentleman from the ex-
planation which he had given; but, in principle, he
thought that to empower railway companies to become
cemetery companies was most objectionable. As the
whole question must come before Parliament at a very
early period, when the report of the Board cf Health
would be before them, he trusted the Honourable Gen-
tleman would not for the present persevere with his
Bill.—(Hear.)
Lord ASHLEY said that last year the duty was en-
trusted to the Board of Health of preparing a scheme
for the consideration of Parliament on this subject, and
that that scheme had been prepared. But he was sorry
that it was not yet in the hands of Hon. MemberF. It
would be ready in a few days, however—he hoped to-
morrow or Thursday morning—and until it was before
them he thought the House should not proceed with
the consideration of the Bill of the Hon. Member for
Bodrnin.
Mr. LACY merely wished to bring i❑ his Bill, in
order that it might be seen and considered side by side
with the report of the Board of Health. He believed
that the House would find, upon consideration, that
without such a measure as he proposed they would never
be axle to carry out any compul.ory Act for preventing
int rments in cities and towns.—(llear, hear.)
Mr. WYLD was surprised that the Home Secretary
should have opposed the introduction of a measure of
this kind. He thought his Bill would not clash with
any recommendation which was likely to emanate from
the Board of Health. He therefore moved for leave to
bring i❑ this Bill.

Mr. LABOUCEIERE said it was always an ungra-
cious task to oppose a Bill on the motion for leave to
bring it in; and it was so i❑ this case, especially where
the Hon. Gentleman had directed great attention to the
subject. The Hon. Gentleman had done him the honour
to convey information to him from time to time as to
the objects he had in view, but he telt it so be a duty ho
owed to the House, as the result of that information, to
say that he thought the House ought not to allow this
Bill to be brought in. He thought the Bill was founded
on principles which the House never could sanction. He
was opposed to thrusting upon the Railway Commis-
sioners Inactions which were so foreign to their sphere
of operations. He really thought there was no chance
of the Bill passing a second reading.
Mr. AGLIONBY did not think the Bill was open to
the objections which had been stated by the Right Hon.
Gentleman. He begged to ask the Hon. Gentleman
whether there was any compulsive powers to take land,
or whether the powers were permissive only ? If the
powers given were only permissive, why wait for the re-
port of the Board of Health? Hitherto in all legisla-
tion on the subject they had been bound by considera-
tions of pounds, shillings, and pence, and the interests
of those who were to receive burial tees.

Mr. LACY said his object was to make the major
part of the powers compulsory, the minor powers might
be taken as compulsory. _ _

Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL thought that the report of
the Sanitary Commissionera should be laid before the
House before any measure of the kind was brought in.
He thought the Hon. Gentleman would best consult the
convenience of the House by postponing the motion till
the report of the Commissioners, which the Noble Lord
the Member for Bath bad stated would be on the table
in a few days, was fairly before the House and the
country.

Ax :EloN. MEMBER hoped the lion. Gentleman would
not divide.

After a few words in explanation from Sir G. GREY,
The motion was withdrawn.
THE BOARD OF TRADE.

Mr. MOFFATT moved for an address to her Ma-
jesty for a return showing the names of the members c,f
her Majesty's Privy Council constituting the Committee
appointed for the consideration of matters relating to
trade and foreign plantations ; the functions of the said
Committee ; the number of members of said Committee
that constitute a quorum for the dispatch of business ;
the number of times the Committee met in the twelve
months ending Dec. 31, 1849 ; and the number cf mem-
bers of said committee that attended each meeting. This
motion was made on account of the present alarm which
prevailed in consequence of the new and extensive
powers assumed by the Board of Trade. Groat anxiety
was felt to know what really ware the functions of the
Board of Trade.

Mr. LABOUCHERE said if he objected to this motion
ho assured the lion. Gentleman it was not from any wish
to refuse the information required. But no Parliamen-
tary grounds had been made fur the production of this
return. He could give the names of those who consti-
tuted the Board of Trade, and everybody knew that the
Court Circular would give this information. The lune-
_ .

tions of the board had been fully described by Mr. John
Leferre, and he (Mr. Labouchere) objected to give the
information in the shape of a return. It was not the
practice of the board to transact business as a board,
though it included numerous members of the Privy
Council, &c. The usual course of business was trans-
acted on the single responsibility of the head of the
department. _ _

'Mr. MOFFATT said that after what bad fallen from
;he Right lion. Gentleman he was satisfied.

COMMONS ENCLOSURE BILL
Read a third time and passed.

PROCESS ANI) PRACTICE (IRELAND)-SALA
RIES ANI) COMPENSATION BILL.

Committee thereon. Howe resumed. lieport to be
received tn-morrow (this day).

Mr. FOX brought up the Sccuhr Education Bill,
which was read a first time.

The House was adjourned at Twelve o'clock.

ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION BILL.

HOUSE OF LORDS, FEB. 25.
The following is a list of the blinolities on the Fccleii-
astical Commission Bill :

BAUONS.
Dunally
Eddisbury
Elphinstone
Foley
donteagle
Saye and See
Sudeley
Wodehouse
Wrottesley

Marquis of Salisbury
Marquis of Londonderry
Lord 1)e Lisle
Earl Somers
Lord 1)e Ros

SECOND DIVISION.
Lord Chancellor EARLS.
MARQUISES. Granville Dunally
Breadalbane Grey Elphinstono
Clanricarde 3liMto Foley
Donegal Strafford Saye and Sale
EARLS. Waldegrave Sudeley
Charlemont BARONS. Wodebouse
Carl.sle Campbell Wrottesley
PAIRED AFTER THE FIRST DIVISION.
Lord Monteagle Earl of Cardigan
Lord Colborne Lord Walsingham
Lord Eddisbury Earl of 3lalniesuury

BARONS.

TO THE SECRETARY OF THE

BRADFORD REFORNI ASSOCIATION.

Sir,—On Monday the 25th, an extraordinary
scene was enacted in the House of Commons, by the
persevering opposition of the anti-Ministerial side to
the progress in Committee, of the Bill fir increasing
the number of voters in Ireland. The ground stated,
was the absence of some Members at the Irish As-
sizes. Of course each side thought it was taking a
prudent course ; though the prevailing opinion seems
to be, that eight divisions with increasing majorities
on the part of the Government, ranging as high as 2i
to 1, were a charitable mode of doing away with any
damage which might have been received from
,the
smallness of the majority on a preceding evening.
The result, however, was, that not one step was
gained towards the progress of the Bill. If any-
body in Ireland is disappointed, he must set it down
to the politicians who could not stir a step without
their men at the Assizes.

In the early part of the evening, the Government
made some damaging admissions, received with
shouts of laughter by the House, on the subject of
not issuing the pieces called florins. If the
Government had their wits about them when they
withdrew from the coins a stupid phrase, con-
demned long since by the good sense of our
ancestors, why did not they stand to it, and
who were the parties before whom they quailed ?
If they knew they had not the courage to resist the
outcry which bigots and serviles might raise, why
did they volunteer the occasion? It is this building
of walls to run their own heads against, which has
ever been characteristic of the Liberals in the Go-
vernment. But if the Government have no plan,
their enemies have. It is all portion of a scheme for
representing them as what the bigots call " godless,"
and so proceeding from less to more, for the chance
of any retrogression towards the illumination of the
middle ages.

On Tuesday a motion for removing the duty on
Attorneys' Certificates was postponed, in a way
which was not considered as favourable to ultimate
success. The hardship in this case appears to be, that
a particular class should be subjected to a duty on the
exercise of their calling, when they pay all the other
taxes to which members of the community are sub-
ject. The plea sometimes urged, that they throw the
duty on their employers, is of the ordinary class of
fallacies with which questions of the incidence of tax-
ation are encumbered.
The motion of the Member for Oldham for leave to
bring in a Bill for the promotion of Secular Educa-
tion, was successful :o the fullest extent. A result
undoubtedly to be attributed to the able and con-
ciliatory manner in which its introduction was con-
ducted by the mover.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
AN OLD REFORMER.
London, 27th February, 1850.

GENERAL STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY.---The
50th half-yearly general meeting of this Corporation
was held vest-relay at their offices, 71, Lombard-street;
John Wilkin, Esq., i❑ the chair. The directors' report
and a statement of the accounts of the half-year ending
the 31st December last, were read to the meeting. The
report having been unanimously adopted by the proprie-
tors, the usual dividend and boaus were declared, when
the meeting separated, highly gratified with the you-
tiuttin prooperity of the C9raPtiDY.