The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-15 00:00:00

THE SUN; LONDON, SATURDAY' EVENING, FEBRUARY 15, 1845.

Now the total amount which you receive from the auction
duty in England, Scotland, and Ireland, is about
300,000 L There is no duty, the remission of which could
in my opinion, lead to so great a reduction in
the expense of collecting. There is no duty, I
think, which is so objectionable in principle
as a duty on the transfer of property. To select one par-
ticular mode of transferring property, quite independent
of conveyances, which apply to all transfers of
property, and to subject that to duty, is a course
open to grave objections ; and I do hope that I have
satisfied the House that although there is no demand
fur this reduction, and although articles might be selected
upon which a reduction would be more popular, yet
looking comprehensively at the interests of property, and
considering the benefit which is conferred on a great
commercial and manufacturing country, by facilitating
the transfer of property, you could not confer
a greater advantage upon the United King-
dom, if you selected other duties in preference to
that which is thus proposed to be reduced to
the amount of 300,0001.—(Hear, hear.) Every
auctioneer is, under the existing law, compelled to take
out a licence. In the first instance he takes out a general
licence of Si. If he is afterwards called on to sell any par-
ticular article which is not included in that licence
there is then a demand made upon him for another
licence of 51.; and, consequently, there are auctioneers
who pay 251. for licences, because some articles are
exposed to sale by auction, where they have to officiate as
auctioneers, which are not covered by the general auction-
duty. Now I propose, instead of the principle of requiring '
separate licences, to enable auctioneers to dispose of
every description of property' by taking out one licence.
I propose to fix the amount of that license at 15/. ;
thus enabling the auctioneers who take it out to deal in
every description of property. I think it is probable
that the number of auctioneers will be increased by the
reduction of the duty. The present number of auction-
eers amount in the whole, I think, to about 4,000. A li-
cence duty of 15/. will raise a revenue of 60,0001., subject,
of course, to the reduction in the present auction duty.
I do not believe that one general licence of 151. would be
felt at all as an onerous impost, while I think it probable
that the number of auctioneers would increase. We
propose, therefore, to reduce the duty upon auctions, and
to substitute for the present system of licensing one uni-
form licence, the maximum cost of which will be 151.
With respect to the article of glass, I must say
that it is one _which has especially occupied my
attention. The duty upon glass has been doubled since
1815, and I think I can show, with respect
to this article, there are grounds of exemp-
tion more than can be alleged for almost
any other article. Without regard to the case
which I might make out for the removal of this
tax, if there were an abundant revenue, there
are no other articles entitled to a preference.
In the first place, let me recite some of the objections to
this charge. The amount of tax is 2001. or 3001. per
cent upon the value of the article ; for instance, the tax
was one shilling per foot, and a manufacturer was asked
what he could supply the articles for, if the duty were
taken off ; and he answered, that he could sell it for 3d.,
or at any rate the price would not exceed 4d.—(Hear,
hear.) We must not estimate this burden at the
mere; amount.—(Hear, hear.) There is no duty which
requires, in order that it may be levied, such a system
of perpetual and such vexatious superintendence.—
(Hear, hear, hear.) Now, compare the export of glass,
which was subject to this vexatious, and necessarilly
vexatious regulations—compare it with the export of an-
other article, which has the good fortune to be ex-
cepted—earthenware. The export ofearthenware last
year amounted to 750,000/., whereas the export of glass,
which was subject to the duty, and subject
to this constant interference with the process
of manufacture, amounted only in the course of the last
year to 388,0004—(Ilcer, hear.) But I wish to state
also another most important fact. There is no Excise
duty on the manufacture of glass in France, in Belgium,
or in Bohemia ; and in Bohemia the manufacture of
glass is brought to the very highest perfection. The
discoveries of chemistry were applied without restric-
tion to the improvement of the manufacture,
and owing to the skill to which they had
attained, the most beautiful colours were produced.
We have particular facilities in this country for
the manufacture of glass ; we have a great
command of labour and of coal, and we
should be able not only to enter into compe-
tition with foreign countries, but we should be
able to beat them. What is the fact? That there being
now no duty on glass in Belgium, Bohemia, and
France, there is no necessity for interfering with
the process of manufacture. What has taken place in
this country? A great import of foreign glass into the
bonded warehouses of this country, and that foreign
glass thus brought into bonded warehouses is afterwards
exported being liable to no duty, and after all this the ex-
porters beat us, not only in foreign countries, but
even in our own colonies. I think I can make out a
case without referring to details. But really these are most
important questions. It is curious to observe the pro-
gress—the gradual increase of the export of foreign glass
over the export of our domestic manufacture. For the
last seven quarters I have closely observed the glass
manufacture and the gradual increase of foreign
glass brought into bonded warehouses, and afterwards
exported from this country, as compared with glass
the produce of our own industry. Is it not a strong
fact, and does it not demonstrate the policy of some new
arrangement in the exeise regulations of this country ?
(Hear.) If we permit this article to be manufactured
duty free, it is very hard to foresee to what perfection
the manufacture of that beautiful fabric may be brought,
considering how much it admitted of the applica-
tion of capital and skill. When a balance-spring
for a chronometer is made in this country it
is made of glass, at least of late years, it
being founi so much superior to steel for such purposes.
It has a greater power of resisting the alternations of
heat and cold, and maintaining its specific gravity. The
manufacture of glass requires so much skill on the
part of the workman, that I do not ;,believe under
the present system of restriction recent discoveries
could be well applied. A chronometer, with a glass
balance-spring, during the late Administration,
had been sent out to the North Seas, and exposed with
nine other chronometers to the cold of that
climate, and the result of that experiment
was reported to be in favour of the chronometer which
had the glass balance-spring as compared with
the nine others. So much for the application of
glass to articles of the utmost delicacy.
But glass has also been applied to another and very
different purpose. It has been manufactured
into pipes used for the conveyance of water, at
a cost of 30 per cent. less than pipes made
of iron ; they will bear great external pressure ;
they are covered with bitumen, and when used for the
conveyance of water, so far as purposes of health are
concerned, glass pipes are entitled to the preference.
This has been done where the excise duties on glass have
been removed. Now take all the articles thus
ranged between ;these two extremes, between the
balance-spring of the chronometer and the pipe for
conveying water, and I ask if it is not difficult
to say to what purposes the manufacture
may not be applied ? But now we collect
our duty on flint glass at an expense of not
less than 57 per cent. on the whole amount col-
lected, and it is necessary, in order to prevent
fraud, to have a series of most minute regulations
with respect to melting the glass and the annealing,
with notices to the excise-officer of every
process which make the application of ingenuity
and skill almost impossible. But relieve it
altogether from these difficulties, as in Bohemia,
France and Belgium, give full and unrestricted
play to the capital and enterprise of this
country, and with its peculiar facility for
obtaining materials, its command of alkali and of coal,
I believe that this country may supply almost all the
world with glass, or at least enter into active competi-
tion with other countries for supplying it. There
are many other arguments I might bring forward, but I
do think I have shown, in the case of glass, so far as
the manufacture of glass is concerned, that there
are peculiar reasons for reducing the duty
on it. Now a case has been made out for the
remission of the window-duty. But take the
case of glass, and see what a much greater effect
the reduction of the duty on glass will have on the
comfort of the labouring classes than a reduction of the
window-duty. It is estimated that in Great Britain
there are 3,500,000 houses : of these not more than
500,000 are charged with the window-duty ;
therefore, there are 3,000,000 of houses which
require glass to be used in them, and which, by the
removal of the tax, would benefit by the whole amount
of the remission. I am afraid I am wearying
the House by these details, but I wish to satisfy those who
hear me that these remissions are not made from any
desire of courting popularity, but that there is good and
substantial cause which leads me to adopt the
reduction of this duty.—(lmmense cheering.)
Then, if we look to the improvement of art, what a
great encouragement it will give to the art of engraving if
we reduce the duty on plate glass. Then, if we look
to the consideration of health, of what immense import-
ance is the article of glass. Nothing prevented the passage
of heat like glass. The passage of heat through a single
plate of glass, compared, with its pass through two

plates of glass having a layer between them, was
as ten to one. The double plates prevented the passage
of heat ; therefore, in encouraging the construction of
double windows, we are taking measures to improve the
health of the community. The Land Commission in Ireland
has recently made its report. I received this report
the day before yesterday. The Commissioners had not
the slightest notion of the intentions of her Majesty's
Government, but in that respect they say that few mea-
sures will contribute more to the comfort and improvement
of the lower classes in Ireland than giving them the
command of glass at a cheap rate. That observation
proves how much the condition of the lower classes in Ire-
land will be improved by the reduction we propose
to effect in the duty on glass. All parts of the
United Kingdom will be benefited by it—lreland,
Scotland, and England, will be equally benefited.
Ireland will derive a direct benefit from the reduction of
the duty on glass, and I do not see any reason why Ireland
should not become the seat of a successful
glass manufacture. If it should not, it will
benefit by the reduction of the duty, which
now amounts to between 200 and 300 per cent.
This reduction will give to the people of Ireland, as
well as the people of Great Britain, the command of
an article essential to their convenience and
comfort.—(Hear, hear.) In every point of view, whether
we consider the amount of the duty, more than two hun-
dred per cent., or the restrictions which the levy-
ing of it imposes on the manufacturer, or the num-
berless purposes to which it may be applied, or
the direct addition which it will make to the
health and comfort, I hope that the House will
acquiesce in the recommendation of her Majesty's Go-
vernment, and select glass as ono of the articles on
which the Excise duty ought to be entirely abolished.
The loss to the revenue from the reduction of the duty
on glass would amount to 640,0001. I have now ex-
hausted the list of articles in respect of which
her Majesty's Government intended to propose the re-
duction of existing taxes. I will now recal to the recollec-

tion of the House the estimate I made of the amount
of revenue, assuming that the income• tax will
be continued. I estimated that a surplus revenue, in
case the income-tax is continued, would be available
on the 6th April, amounting to 3,490,0001. I shall now
recapitulate the estimate of the reductions which
would arise from the reduction or repeal o
the different duties which I enumerated. I mentioned
them specifically before, as to their amount, but I will
now state the aggregate amount of reductions. The
estimated loss of sugar, then is X1,300,000
The estimated loss on coal is
The loss on the duty of minor articles im-
ported, being the raw materials of manu-
factures
The estimated loss on cotton-wool
The estimated loss on auction duty
The estimated loss in glass .. 640,000

I include the loss on staves in the 320,0001.
The total loss to revenue I am now
speaking of the immediate loss—(Hear,
hear)—if our reductions are sanctioned by
the House, would be
very nearly absorbing the actual surplus from the in-
come •tax of 3,490,0001. I stated before, that in pro-
posing the continuation of the income-tax, we pro-
posed it for the purpose of having a large
surplus revenue, but I thought it sight to
appropriate the surplus, after defraying the recurring ex-
penditure of the country, to the removal of those bur-
dens which pressed most heavily on the industry of
the country ; and I conceive that the amount of
reductions made fulfil that part of the pledge.
Now, observe that I have taken no credit for the
ultimate saving that will be certain to result by the
reduction of the duty upon glass, for I do contend for
it, that the result will be a very material saving.
Observe also, that I have taken no credit for the increase
of consumption that must follow the removal of the
heavy duty on the articles of manufacture.—(Hear, hear.)
This is an experiment, certainly, and I do not hesitate
to say it is a bold experiment.—(Hear.) But, looking at
the result of the experiment we made last year—
(Cheers)—looking at what is now the state of the
Customs' revenue after the reduction that has been
made—seeing that the Customs' revenue on the
sth of January, 1845, presents a surplus as compared
with that of the same period last year, of a sum not
less than 1,305,0001.—(Hear, hear)—after deduct-
ing the loss of 122,0001., which arose from
cotton-wool last] year, and a sum of 61,0001.
on sheeps' wool—the reduction on the revenue,
after snaking this great experiment, will be 1,305,0001.
—(Cheers.) I have already stated that I intend to call
upon the House to continue the income-tax for a further
limited period, because I have the most confident persua-
sion that the reductions made on the articles I have men-
tioned will be followed by the most beneficial re-
sults.—(Hear, hear.) W hen I proposed the continu-
ance of the income-tax, it was met by some objections.
It was said that the country would be disappointed
at the result, and that the increased amount of tax-
ation would tell unfavourably on the country. It was said
that unless there was a reduction in the assessed taxes
to an amount equivalent to the surplus, there would be
dissatisfaction, and that at any rate there should
be a diminution of some sort in the assessed
taxes. Now, what is the fact? There is no reduction
in the assessed taxes proposed; but look at the reductions
that have been made in the other taxes of the country.
There has been a small reduction of some 40,0001. or
50,0001. of the duties on carriages and horses, but that re-
duction is traceable to the progress of railwa)
conveyance ; and it is only extraordinary that
the reduction has not been greater ; but if you
exclude the operation of those other causes
of reduction, my belief is that the net of assessed
taxes during the operation of the income-tax
has been greater than was before. I say,
it cannot be contended from the experience of the in-
come-tax, that it must of necessity diminish the revenue.
Concurrently with its operation our revenue has
increased. Remember this, and I don't conceal
the fact, and it will enter into your consultations
when you consider whether the income-tax shall be
continued or not. Remember this—that during
its operation, the revenue has so prospered that
the receipts in the present year, independent of
the income-tax, almost amounted to the expenditure
of the country. Of course we might hare avoided
making this experiment —we might have ap-
plied the surplus of the present year without
making increased taxes ; but we propose the
income-tax, not for the supplies of the year, but for
the purpose of enabling us to make this great experi-
ment. In the reduction of duties, the period for which
we propose the income-tax will not exceed the
period for which it was originally introduced.
I cannot say when making this very extensive
reduction—l will not say it might not have been a wiser
course to give a longer period for the purpose of testing
the efficacy of the plan, but at the same time I think
it natural that Parliament should ask to have the
control over this tax for a period not greater
than it was first proposed. We do not ask
that the income-tax should endure for more than
three years—for a less period I hope the House
will not see the necessity for its continuance. At the
expiration of three years I have a confident belief that
that will have occurred which has now occurred, and
that it will be competent for you to dispense with
the income-tax altogether. I have such a confidence in the
elasticity of the resources of the country that before three
years shall have elapsed the revenue will have increased
to such a degree as will enable you to dispense with the tax
altogether. Remember this, that the principles on which
we have gone, we have gone on advisedly. We have in
every case absolutely repealed the tax. We have not di-
minished the tax on glass and kept up a quarter of it.
We have not diminished a small proportion of the tax
on cotton. We have proposed the absolute repeal of the
tax, and, therefore, from the increased consumption
of that article we cannot expect any benefit ;
but we do hope that indirect and incidental effects will be
produced, and will be the cause of increased consumption
of many articles subject to duty, and by invigorating
the industry and extending the commercial enterprise
of the country, and by indirect channels, to supply that
void which we cannot hope to supply by direct taxa-
tion. Sir, I believe that I have now executed the task
which devolved on me.—(Cheers.) I have, however
imperfectly, explained the views and intentions of
her Majesty's Government with respect to the
financial and commercial policy of the country.
I trust the House will, as they did before, without
now pronouncing any hasty or precipitate judgment, con-
sider comprehensively the whole of the plan we have
offered, and will consider whether or not it
will he for the interest of the country to
adopt it ; and, after mature deliberation, my hope and
belief is that the decision of the House will
be in favour of the proposal which I have
made. Whatever may be the decision of the
House, at any rate we shall have the consolation
of knowing that we have not sought popularity by
evading the question of continued taxation.—
(Hear, hear.) Wo have not acted in deference to
any popular clamour, for we have selected taxes for
reduction in respect to which there is no clamour and
no agitation. I know it will be said that the principles
which I have laid down are capable of much
further extension, and that I ought to have, in
deference to those principles, made a still more extensive

reduction of duty. But it is our object, while we estab-
lish the principle, at the same time viewing the state
of society, and the magnitude of the interests involved
—the consequences upon those interests, of a hasty and
rash interference, our avowed object is to realise the
utmost degree of good, without the disturbance or alarm
of interests, 'which cannot be disturbed, and which can-
not be alarmed, without paralysing the industry of the
country. Sir, I submit, therefore, this proposal on the
part of her Majesty's Government to the judgment of this
House. We have adopted it after careful consideration.
We recommend it on the deliberate conviction that the

sanction of it by this House will conduce to the

extension of industry and the encouragement of
enterprise, and that the result of that extension of that
industry and the result of the encouragement of that en•
terprise to all classes of the country, whether directly
connected with commerce or industry, be they manu-
facturing, be they agricultural, or be they not connected
with any particular department of industry, our conviction
is, that by the adoption of this proposal, industry and
commerce will be immediately benefited, and that
indirectly every class in this great community will find
its welfare promoted.
The Right Hon. Gentleman sat down amidst great

cheering from the Opposition benches. He spoke for

three hours and a quarter.

The question having been put,
Sir ROBERT PEEL said he did not wish the

House to affirm any proposition that night ; but
he trusted that they would see the great importance,
on account of many branches of commerce, of pro-
ceeding as early as possible to the consideration of

the various proposals. He hoped they would be in
a condition to pronounce, on Monday, on the general
outlines. Of course, the affirmation of the reso•
lution would not bind the House, but its

adoption would enable the 'louse to proceed at once
to take the sense of the House with respect to the pro-
posed alterations.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, considering the impor-
tance of the subjects which had bQen brought before the
House, he quite concurred in what had fallen from

the Right Hon. Baronet. He would-not ask for a day's
delay beyond Monday ; and on that occasion he would
take a general view of his proposals. The sugar duties
formed a most important part of the plan, and
one which he thought was open to much
objection ; but he would say nothing on the
subject till the debate on Monday night.
Sir R. PEEL said it was desirable to proceed as soon as
possible with all the articles except glass, which would require
some previous communication with the manufacturers.
Mr. LIDDELL was glad to hear that a reduction was to be
made in the duty on coals, but there were some observations
made by the Bight Hon. Baronet in which he could not con-
cur. Those observations were entered into with marked atten-
tion, and appeared to create no small sensation on the other
side of the House ; but he could not allow them to pass unno-
ticed, because he was naturally jealous of his own honour and
of the honour of those whom he represented.—( Hear, hear.)
He could not but regret that the Right Hon. Baronet should
have felt called upon to comment upon what he termed a com-
bination in the coal trade. In spite of the evidence which had
been given, on a former occasion, by competent parties, a
great misapprehension still prevailed on this subject ; but he
would nevertheless content himself by disproving it in one
single sentence, which he trusted would put an end to this
too general and unfortunate misapprehension. The Right
Hon. Baronet had presumed that this combination existed,
but he certainly was in error. No such combination had
ever to his knowledge existed, and if any Hon. Gentleman
on the opposite side of the House would think proper to move
for a Select Committee to inquire into the subject, ho would
gladly second it.—( Hear, hear. )
Lord HOWICK could not help expressing his satisfaction
at finding the Right Hon. Baronet was now convinced that
his present step was not quite so bad a move as he seemed to
think it was last year, and the year before. His conviction,
however, was, that if the coal-owners had sat quietly down
under this tax till her Majesty's Government thought fit to
repeal it, the year 1945 would not have been distinguished by
its repeal. If any Hon. Member followed the advice of
the lion. Gentleman who spoke last, he thought it could be
distinctly proved that the combination not only did exist,
but that it did a very serious injury to the City of London as
well. He thought this could be proved, and proved to de-
monstration too. It was a combination adverse and contrary
to every principle of fair trade, and it had not only been inju-
rious to the country, but to the parties who formed it. Com-
binations of masters were not less serious in their results

than combinations of workmen were injurious to them. The
strike of last year produced extreme suffering to the labourers
in the collieries, and his conviction was, that the regulations
which existed for the last few years had been attened with
the very worst results to the coal-owners. Having said thus
much, he should follow the wish of the Right Hon. Baronet,
and avoid expressing any opinion till Monday upon the :general
character of the Budget. But there was one point upon which
he entertained a very strong opinion, and he could not, even
at that moment, refrain from making a remark or two upon it.
There was an insurmountable objection to the arrangement the
Right Hon. Baronet proposed with regard to sugar. He could
not help regretting that the Right Hon. Baronet had not fol-
lowed the same course—and he might have done so without
any serious sacrifice of revenue—with regard to sugar he did to
coal. He did not agree in his maintaining a distinction be-
tween free-labour sugar and slave-grown sugar. The Right
Hon. Baronet, while he was dealing with the Excise duties,
might have removed the duty on bricks without very mate-
rially diminishing the resources at his command. But he did
not mean to say thus much, but he could not avoid
protesting against the measure which admitted free-labour
sugar at a much lower valuation than any other. It had
produced much mischief, and he hoped the Right Hon. Baronet
would shortly see the necessity of repealing it.
Mr. T. BARING, as the representative of a coal-mining
district, could not suffer the reflections which had been made
upon the coal-owners to pass unnoticed. Uut at the same time
he must thank the Right Ilan. Baronet for removing a tax
which had pressed very severely on the whole body of coal-
owners. It was untrue that a combination had existed which
allowed the foreigner to have an advantage over this country.
There was no such thing as had been asserted as two prices.
The fact was, the foreigner would not take the high-priced
coal, and hence, probably, arose the mistake into which some
Hon. Members had fallen. He eould state positively that the
foreigner did not, nor ever did, possess an advantage over the
home consumer.

Mr. tjg
IbEe e didcnh oa
ramg
ar eneesvf i
at hc we amt
ittht
ee
eH
ao
pnp.
011inIefemdbetre saiind_,
quire into some matters relating to the coal district,
for h n
he could
state that from the evidence which came before him he had
every reason to believe in the existence of the alleged combi-
nation. He merely rose to say, that although the first part of
the Right Honourable Baronet's speech required great
consideration, his opinion of the last part was fully made
up. He fully agreed in the principle which had
actuated the Right Honourable Baronet, and he thought
the selections the Right Hon. Baronet had made were most
judicious. There was but one article to which he could object,
and that was sugar. The window-tax pressed heavily on the
country, but he agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet that the
repeal of the duty on glass would be attended with much more
Benefit than the remission of the window-tax. He trusted he
should see the day when the Excise department would be alto-
gether abolished, and no other duties suffered to exist but those
on malt and spirits, which might be transferred to some other
department.
After a few words from Mr. TURNER,
Lord CLEMENTS expressed some regret that the Right
Hon. Baronet had made no further reduction of the duties on
timber. Such a step would be a great benefit to Ireland. It
would enable them to build their habitations much cheaper than
they did at present.
Mr, 11. HINDE did not wish to trouble the House with
many remarks, but he could not help concurring in the
general expression of satisfaction which the Right Hon.
Baronet's speech had produced. He wished, however, to say
a few words with reference to glass. He agreed in the ex-
pediency of reducing the duty on this article, but he thought
the Right Hon. Baronet ought to allow a drawback on the
stock in hand. If he did not, the property of the manufac-
turer would be depreciated. An additional tax was to be im-
posed on auctioneers. This, he believed, would be attended
with no beneficial result.
Many persons in the country pro.
cured a livelihood by following this occupation, but if they
were subject to this tax, they would be compelled to relin-
quish it.
Sir R. PEEL said, considering the period when the
re-
duction would be made, the Government did not intend to
allow a drawback on the stock in hand.
Dr. BOWRING would have rejoiced if the Right Hon.
Baronet had consented to a modification of the property-tax.
It was his wish that the tax should be made permanent instead
of transitory. He regretted to hear that it was thei intention
of of her Majesty's Government to augment the navae
and mili-
tary force of the country.
.. T
t was quite unnecfer the pro-
sy, as-
much as the exigencies of the times did not call
posed increase.
Col. SIBTHORP regretted extremely that the Right Hon.
Baronet did not introduce, amongst his list of reductions, a re-
mission in the post-horse and hackney carriage duty. The post-
masters had been greatly injured by having to contend with
the railways, which now communicated to all parts of the
kingdom ; and he (Colonel Sibthorp) thoughts that it would
but have been even-handed justice if, for the remission to be
made in that duty, he had added an equivalent to the duties
borne by the system which had almost ruined them.
Mr. ROEBUCK, although conceding that the benefits
which the Right Hon. Baronet had proposed would meet with
universal approbation, would not disguise the fact that these
benefits were quite counterbalanced by the mischiefs arising
from the operation of the income-tax and property-tax.
Those mischiefs would be a great drawback in the general
benefits accruing to the community from the remissions pro-
posed by the Right Hon. Baronet. This obnoxious law had
been termed indifferently the property or the income-tax ; but
he (Mr. Roebuck) observed a very great distinction between
incomes derived from professional exertions, and those deriva.
ble from property. If the Right Hon. Baronet had but gone
a step further, and modified that tax, then, indeed, his pro-
positions made that night would be hailed as a relief by the
community. Still he gave the Right Hon. Baronet credit for
a very great advance made in the right direction—the greatest
advance he (Mr. Roebuck) had yet seen or had known of in
the course of the Ministry's existence ; and while he thanked
the Right Hon. Baronet for the good he had promised, he had
felt it but right to point out a source of mischief which might
have been avoided.
Mr. WAKLEY said, that considering the very great good
that had been promised them by the Right Hon. Baronet, he
could not, for one, find one word of condemnation. He (Mr.
Wakley) represented a large constituency in that metropolis,
and in their names he could not refrain from expressing his
extreme satisfaction at the propositions made that night by the
Right Hon. Baronet. All the reductions he had promised
had a direct tendency to relieve the poorer classes,
and to promote the course of industry, and in promoting
that, the Right Honourable Baronet did the greatest service
to the country. He would not, therefore, as he had stated
already, say one word in condemnation of any one of his pro-
positions, for he (Mr. WakleY) was but too much gratified for
the good lie proposed to the best interests of the working
classes.
Sir R. H. IN GLIS, while agreeing in the commendations
passed upon the Right Hon. Baronet, could not help wishing
that in a proposed continuance of the income-tax, only the
salaries which exceeded 1501. should be affected by it. This
would relieve a large proportion of the industrious class, who
were least able to bear its pressure, from the income-
tax ; and he also concurred in the observations made
by the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, that it would be
highly expedient were those exempted from the operation of
the tax whose dependence was soley on their daily exertions,
or their healths, or on the popnlar applause. It was hard that
persons in public or commercial offices should pay the same tax
upon their incomes as if they had derived them from land. It was
hard that the poorer classes should pay in the same proportion
that the Duke of NortiAtob9/1411d Qt any other nobleman did ;

and he trusted it was not too late now to give the subject their
best attention.

Lord DUNCAN rose to express his admiration of the Budget
brought forward by the Right Hon. Baronet, but he would re-
mind him that while he granted exemptions in the case of the
auction duty, there were instances in which persons should be
equally exempted from the operation of the income-tax.
Mr. CURTEIS thought that the country ought to have
time to exhibit its opinion on the Budget, and to show whether
they were for or against the Right Hon. Baronet. They were
taking the country by surprise, by only allowing them one
post day to exhibit the feelings with which the Right Hon.
Baronet's intentions would be received in the country. With
respect to the property-tax, he had been one of the Commis-
sioners under that Act, and it was such an odious duty that he
had made a vow that he should always vote against a continu- '
ance of the tax ; and he was determined to divide the House
on Monday, if supported but by twelve Hon. Members. He
recommended the agricultural Gentlemen opposite to consider
whether it would not be better to do away with the property
or income-tax, rather than support the Right Hon. Baronet
in the measure which he had that night brought forward.
Mr. WARD observed that the Hun. Member who had spoken
last had said that the country would be taken by surprise. He
( Mr. W) thought it would, for certainly few had expected such a
liberal measure from the Right Hon. Baronet. A measure founded
on such sound principles--a measure embracing such a com-
prehensive view of the extended interests of this country, and
intended to further its prosperity in such a degree, he did not
expect ; and therefore he (Mr. Ward) begged to add his evi-
dence to those who had gone before him, as to the beneficial
effects to be derived from the propositions of the Right Hon.
Baronet. With respect to the sugar-duties, a difference of
opinion might be expected ; but at present they had only to
look to the schemes propounded as conferring benefits on the
most widely-extended interests, and as acting upon the most
important springs of industry.
AGLIONBY considered that the benefits which would
be conferred on the country were greater than any for many
years past. One point only he would beg to submit with great
deference (whether to be considered now or at a future period)
was the duty on tea. He had been informed that the coarser
qualities paid a much higher rate of duty in proportion than
was exacted for the finer kinds, and this pressed particularly
heavy upon the poorer classes of the community. He hoped
the subject would be considered by the Right lion. Baronet.
Sir IL PEEL expressed himself gratified with the concur-
rence which had been so readily granted to the propositions he
had made, by Hon. Members on both sides of the House. And
with respect to the observation of one Hon. Member, that the
country had been taken by surprise, he (Sir R. Peel) was sure
that the only part of his scheme to which any objection had
been raised, viz., the income-tax, had been alluded to at the
very commencement of the session, and therefore the country
might have been prepared for it. He did not think that any
material opposition would be given to the remainder of his
propositions. •
Mr. ROEBUCK said that the lion. Gentleman behind him
(Mr. Curteis) might depend upon it that the income-tax would
not be a measure enacted only for three years, but that it would
be permanent for the rest of his life.—(Laughter.)
Lord J. RUSSELL wished to know whether it was intended
to modify the income-tax, or to renew it in its present form ?
Sir R. PEEL proposed to renew the tax as it at present
stood. He did not wish to enter at any length on the subject,
as by so doing he would but prolong a discussion which at pre-
sent was better avoided.
Mr. E. BULLER was not so enthusiastically fond of the
Budget as many of his lion. Friends on that (the Liberal) side
of the House appeared to be, fur he thought that the income-
tax would more than counterbalance the good which would
be effected by the propositions of the Right Hon. Baronet.
The Hon. Baronet stated, in proposing the income-tax, that
it should only exist for three or five years, and now they
were to renew it. There was an uncertainty now as to when
it should cease, and he cautioned Hon. Members that, instead
of a temporary tax, they would find it a permanent one. Let
the Right Hon. Baronet not deceive himself in supposing that
the reduction of duty would increase the demands for the
articles on which such reduction had been made, to such an
extent that the revenue would not suffer, for after his experi-
ence of 1841, could he rely on the expectation that three
millions of taxes would be made up in a three years' consump-
tion.—( Hear.) He warned Hon. Members therefore against
being deceived by the fallacious expectations held out to them by
the Right Hon. Baronet.
Mr. WARBURTON could not agree in the sentiment ex-
pressed by the Hon. Member who had just sat down. It did
appear to him (Mr. Warburton) that the income-tax was one
which had not been felt as an oppressive one by any parties,
and that it would not be in future.—( Hear, hear.) Surely
every person should understand that all those whose income
existed but for one year paid the tax but for one year.—( Hear,
hear, and a laugh.) And from those upon whom the tax was
enforced, whose income was in perpetuity, all objection to the
payment of it by that class vanished altogether.—(Laughter. )
lie felt quite persuaded that any person who calmly
considered this question must see that it never could have
been intended to be permanent. —( Hear.) He now begged to
mention what appeared to him to be a very important matter
as connected with the announcement of the Right Hon. Baro-
net this evening. He meant with regard to the measure about
to be proposed, affecting the duty on sugar. lie entirely con -
curred in all that had fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet. ex-
cept that port'on of his statement, for it appeared to him (Mr.
W.) that the Right Hon. Baronet was going to give all the
benefits of his proposed reduction on sugar to the grower, and
not the consumer. As this question was to come again before
the House, he would not further dwell upon it at present.
Lord JOHN MANNERS spoke in favour of the Budget
generally, and expressed his approval of the continuance of the
income-tax in particular, as a sound and beneficial measure,
for it would press heavily only on those who could afford to
pay it. With regard to what had been said by the Hon.
Member opposite upon the duties of the Income-tax Com-
missioners' he was not now prepared to answer upor that
question ; but his opinion was, that the selection made of those
officers was
.most judicious and highly satisfactory to the
country.
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN believed that all classes of
the community, agricultural as well as others, would derive
material benefit from the reduction of the duty upon glass.
Sir R. PEEL, in answer to a question from Sir Charles
Napier, in reference to the amount of the navy estimates,
said that the sum required for that branch of the public ser-
vice would be about 960,0001., and the Gallant Officer might
rest assured that it would be as judiciously and as economically
applied as her Majesty's Government could suggest.
Sir C. NAPIER begged to assure the Right Hon. Baronet
that he did not mean to make this either a party or political
question. All he looked for was that the Hon. Baronet would
institute an investigation, with a view to discovering the best
mode of providing the country w itk an efficient steam naval
force.—The House then resumed.

► DIRECT NORTHERN RAILWAY.
A special general meeting of the Shareholders in the
Direct Northern Railway Company was held yesterday,
at the office in Moorgate street, for the purpose of
authorising the Provisional Committee to proceed to
Parliament.

The Hon. Mr. ASHLEY occupied the chair, and after
briefly stating the object of the meeting, he requested
th© secretary to read a report which had been prepared
for the occasion.

The report minutely detailed the many advantages
possessed by the project, and recommended the Pro-
prietors to empower the Committee, in case it should be
subsequently thought advisable, to extend the expendi-
ture beyond 10s. per share, the original sum specified in
the prospectus of the Company.
The report having been adopted,
The CHAIRMAN proposed to read a memorial to the
Board of Trade on the subject of the scheme, but
Mr. Alderman COPELAND objected to it, and
The CHAIRMAN acceded to the wish of the worthy
Alderman, and abstained from reading the document.
Mr. MATHESON, M.P., who expressed himself strongly
in favour of the Company, moved the first resolution,
directing the Committee of Management to remove the
ninth clause of the subscribers agreement, limiting the
expenditure to 10s. per share, and authorising them to
appropriate the funds already paid up to any expenses
which might be incurred in applying to the Legislature
for an Act of Parliament sanctioning the project.
Mr. CHAPMAN seconded the motion.
Mr. Hum' protested against any additional expendi-
ture, beyond the 10s. per share, because he had pur-
chased largely, on the understanding that the prelimi-
nary expenses were not to exceed that sum. He, there-
fore, should enter a public protest against the proposition.
The CHAIRMAN asked the lion. Proprietor if he in-
tended to move an amendment ?
Mr. HuNT replied in the negative. He should simply
content himself by protesting against the additional ex-
penditure, because he did not think it was acting fairly
with the shareholders.
One of the Committee offered to purchase the Hon.
proposer's stock at 21. per share.
Mr. HUNT said he should be a considerable loser if he
sold them for that price.
Mr. Ilosce (of Norwich)—Well, then, I will give you
21. ss. for them.—(Laughter.)
The CHAIRMAN—Pray, gentlemen, don't let us con-
vert our meeting into a stock exchange. s the Hon.
Proprietor going to move an amendment or not?
Mr. HUNT—I can't say that I am. I only protest
against any further outlay.
Mr. CHAPMAN was sure there was not another gentle-
man present who did not fully concur in the terms of
the resolution. The Hon. Proprietor appeared to make
a personal matter of the loss of his 10s. per share.
Mr. HUNT—I bought them at a large premium.
Mr. CIIAPMAN—No doubt the Hon. Proprietor did;
but a fair and liberal offer had been made to him, and
why did he refuse it ? It would place him in the same
position now as when he purchased the stock with his
eyes open. He trusted, therefore, the Hon. Proprietor
would either accept the offer of 21. 55., or consent to
withdraw his protest.
Mr. HUNT preferred adopting the latter course, and
the resolution was carried unanimously.
Mr. CROMBY, in moving a vote of thanks to the Pro-
visional Committee for their past exertions, passed a very
warm euiogium upon them for the zeal and attention
they had paid to the interests of the Company. He only
detained the meeting to relate to them the feeling enter-
tained in Scotland on the subject of the line. In that
part of the kingdom they were all favourable to the pro-
ject, and the reason was obvious—it: would be a great
advantage to Scotland. Why at present it took
him to come to London from Aberdeen, the
town in which he resided, upwards of four-and-
thirty hours, and then he had to be out of bed and travel-
ling two nights. Now, if their line was carried, they
would be able to leave Edinburgh at eight o'clock in the
morning and reach London by eight o'clock the same
evening. It was a wonderful improvement—(Cheers)—
and he would defy any company to show how this could
possibly be effected without the aid of the Direct Northern
Railway.—(Hear.)
Mr. REDEWAY seconded the resolution, which was
carried by acclamation.
The CZIAIRMAN, in acknowledging the compliment,
said the Committee felt that they deserved the
confidence of the Shareholders, or they would
not have asked them to go on with the
undertaking. They had done their best to
promote the interests of the Company, and with their
continued support they had no doubt success would at-
tend them in a Committee of the House of Commons.

The meeting, which was very numerously attended,
and occupied about three.quarters of au hour, then
broke up.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
SECONDARIES' COURT, Feb. 14.
(Before Mr. Secondary POWER.)
COOPER V. WATTS.

The whole of the forenoon was occupied in this hearing,
which was an action at the instance of J. Cooper, tailor, New
Bond-street, to recover from H. Watts, of Lincoln's Inn-fields,
the sum of 161. 45., for goods supplied at various times from the
beginning of 1841 to the end of 1843. While the delivery
of the amount of goods named was not denied, it was stated
for the defence that Mr. Watts never bad any transactions
with the plaintiff, but only with his son, Mr. Edward
Cooper, whom he understood to be a principal in the
business; that all the orders for goods were given
personally to Edward Cooper, at the premises in
Bond-street, and not to the plaintiff; and that at
various times the defendant, as a set MI, had supplied Mr,
Edward Cooper with other goods to the value of 261. 12s. 6d.
so that actually defendant had overpaid him more than 101.
Evidence was called to show that whatever might be the
impression of Mr. Watts in relation to Mr. Edward
Cooper's position in the business, that the latter was
only foreman to his father ; and, further, that all
the transaction* of the business were conducted in the name
of James Cooper only up to May, 1844, several months after
the debt was contracted. The son bad for a few months
after that period carried on business on his own account, but
had been obliged to give it up from the difficulties
In which he had been involved through im-
proper conduct, and was new nowhere to be found.
The son had supplied the goods to Mr. Watts only in the
capacity of servant to his father, and had no right whatever
to set off any private debt of his own against the transaction.
The jury, after a short consultation, returned a verdict for
the full amount of 16/. 4s.