The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-05 00:00:00

same deficiency in the revenue in 1847, which existed in 1642.
The effect of renewing this tax would he to give the public
exchequer in April 1846. a surplu• revenue of 4,560,0001 ,
which would enable the Government now to remove
certain burdens, which at the present moment pressed
with great severity upon the prosperity of the country. They
proposed to remove all duties imposed. on raw materials, with
the exception of timber, and they did so with the view of enabling
the British manufacturer to compete with foreigners aeroad.
The Noble Lord then went through the various articles upon
which the duty is to be taken off, comm, nting as he went
slung uper, those which he thought most important. In respect
to glase it might he asked why they did not choose soap in-
stead of this article ; hut, for his part, he confess, d they could
not well do without the amount of duty levied on sow, while the
removal of the ditty on glass would open a wide field for the
operation of the manufacture= of the country. The amount of
duty proposed to be taken off was 6,0001. Then came the ar-
ticle of cotton wool, the duty upon which amounts to 650,000/,
This they proposed to take off, as well as to make
a reduction in the duty of sugar to the extent of 130,000/.
This would undoubtedly reduce the price of sugar, and
place it within the reach of those who had never hewn
able to enj .y it before. These, and other reductions, when
deducted from the 4,000,000/. would still have a surplus of
890,0(101. It might be objected that these reductions would
result in making these imposts permanent taxes, but he
thought the experience of the past justified the belief that the
commercial affairs of the country would be so improved as to
enable them to discoleinue the tax at the end of three years.
If they looked back they would find that not only had the
national debt been reduced, within the last three years, from
29,452,000/. to 28,365,000/. hut that the value of our imposts h d
increased by no less than 5,695.0(10/. Now, all this convinced
bim that at the end of three years they would be in a position
to dispense with both the income and property-tax. The pros-
pect of commercial prosperity was such, if they might judge of
the steady progress of the last few years, as to hear them out in
the supposition they bad just expressed. Witheut referring to
the two great subjects of reduction further, and for a moment
only touching upon wool and timber, he would lay before the
House a few statements of what might be considered the minor
articles which bad been affected by the reduction of 1842. The
first he would take was coffee, and he would state the gradual
increase which had been experienced in the consumption of
that article during the last five years. In 1810, the consump-
tion had been, according to the Cus om-house reports,
28,664,0001b5. ; for 1841, it was 28,370,000 lbs. ; for 1842,
28,593,0001b5. In 1843, 29,979 OCOlbs. In 1844, 31,394,000
lbs. Showing an increase of upwards of 2,700,0001b5. And be
would observe, that in 1842 the greatest quantity of coffee bad
been consumed which had ever been known during any pre-
vious period. There was another article, which perhaps many
of their Lordships had never yet seen—(A laugh)—but he had
had an opportunity of not only seeing, but using it, and had
found it both nutritious and palatable, he meant chiccory.
Their Lordships might smile, but it was well known that in
France coffee was seldom used without a dash of chiccory.
He did not mean to say, that the coffee might not be
as well without it, but the introduction of chiccory reduced
the expense, and did not in the least degree affect the aroma.
The introduction of chiccory in 1840 was 1,440,000 lbs. ; in
1841, 1,921,000 lbs. ; in 1842, 2,268,000 lbs. ; in 1843,
2,448,000 lbs. ; and in 1844, 3,164.000 tbs. Cocoa also, which
was an article of much request in some ranks of society, had in-
creased 2,596,004/Ibs. within the last five years. Now it might
be supposed that the increase of these articles might have been
made at the expense of tea, which was used fur si-
milar purposes as the articles he had just.
named. But what was the fact ? In 1840 the
quantity of tea introduced was 32,250,000 lbs. In
1841, 36.675,0001b5. In 1842, 37,353,0001b5. In 1843,
40,293,0001b5.; and in 1844, 41,366,001b5., showing an in-
crease in 1845 of no less than 4 722 0001bs., since the time
that the reduction took place, and not less than one-fourth of
the whole quantity that had been computed, if ths whole five
were to be taken into consideration. As might naturally be
expected, there had been a corresponding increase in the con•
sueoption of sugar. Not only had the comfort of the people
been added to, but there had been a great advantage obtained
in obviating the adulteration of this article, which had been long
effec:ed by all sorts of articles. It should be remembered that
this was an increase in consumption, accompanied by no arti-
fice, without any undue extension of the currency, and indeed
in the fare of a law which had been passed for restraining t e
amount, and which had effectually secured it from any depre-
ciation in its value. It was evident, therefore, thai this was a
solid increase, and that they might rely—and they mieht safely
rely—on the increase of the Customs' duties for enabling them
to do away, at the end of three years, with this obj fctioneble
and most ungracious tax. He. therefore, thought he might
safely call upon their Lordships to consent to the third reading
of the Bill.
On the motion that the Bill b'- read a third time,
The Marquis of LANS DOW NE said there were three
reasons whic'e weuld justify the imposition of ae inainne-tax—
the existence and long c intinuance of a for.uidable war. the
still greater importance of inter ins commotion and civil broil,
and the third, a defiffiency in the revenue. which they had no
other means to supply. It was on the first of these reasons
that Mr. Pitt, Lord Grenville. and Lord Seymour, had intro-
duced it. It was on the third that Si, Robert Peel had pro-
posed it to Parliament in 1542. He saw no reason to hope,
even from the statement of his Noble Friend, that they would
be able to Tema the tax at the end of the three years. He
feared, iodead, there was some ulterior reason fir the proposi-
tion of the tax. and that it was intended to substitute this system
of taxation for that indirect mode which had hitherto prevailed.
He found, upon the statement of the Gove-nment, that the
revenue, with the arrears of the property-tax, would be fiftye
nine millions. He disclaimed any desire to stint the public
service of the country. He did not complain of the increase of
estimates for the public service. He would be still less dis-
posed to refuse any grant of public money for the support of
that arm of the public service, the navy. There was a pro-
position of the Government which gave him unqualified plea-
sure—that was the increased grant for the education of the
Catholic priesthood in Ireland. He looked with entire satis-
faction upon the measures which the Government had adopted
to release industry. Still, a, he thought, ministers ought to be
sincere in their declaration that the property-tax was only
temporary, they should at the same time take measures which
would enable them to repeal it. One of the great objections
of the present Prime Minister to the repeal of the malt-tax
was, that it would lead to the imposition of a property-tax in
kriger,T.Trig a't-tre"r partis gteersn'aerj'pt,:e",7(7i,"aelry ..,ks "M
country, declared that he would not attempt to make up the
deficiency of the revenue by the imposition of a property-tax.
He did not agree with the Prime Minister in thinking that
there were not other means by which the deficiency could be
made up with greater benefit to the public. Lie had heard,
as well as his Noble Friend opposite, that there were
persons who called themselves " philosophers," and who
liked " this tax on account of its equality. But he
would ask their Lordships could they imagine anything
more unequal than the operation of this tax ? The
tax was imposed upon persons whose income depended
almost entirely upon their state of health. Was it to
subject them to the same amount of taxation as persons who
derived their income from fixed property? Again, if he came
to the funds, he might ask were all the persons who had pro.
perty in the funds to be dealt with alike? The mere fact that
a certain amount of property stood in a man's name in the
books at the bank was not sufficient to show that he enjoyed
that property. So also was it with respect to landed property.
The declared income of a man from landed property was not a
fair index of his means of paying taxes.—(Hear, hear.) He
would not deny that in direct taxation there
was this advantage, that every man would know what
he was contributing to the necessities of the State. But the
difficulties in the way of justly apportioning an income-sax
wee not to be obviated by any scheme which he had ever
heard propounded. He would not propose the entire rejection
of the Bill, which, however, he looked upon, after all, , a a Bill
for ultimately taxing labour ; hut he hoped their Lordships
would modify its pressure. He would not objec- so strongly to
the Bill, as a temporary measure, if he saw it accomeattied by
other measures which would enable the Government to dis-
pense with it at i•he end of three years.—( Hear.) It had been
said that this tax was populir. Out there had been no proof
that it was popular except with those who had not to pay it—
( Hear, and a I,iugh. ) He did not believe that the country
would he reconciled to the tax. arid he hoped that Parliament
would find the means of inducing the Government to abandon
it at the end of three years.
Lord ASFIBUR. TON s iid that the present discussion af-
ford d him an i pportunity of staling the grounds upon which
he hat the misfortune to differ %a HI theemest prominent mem-
bers of both parties in Parliament and the country. He, how-
ever, agreed with the Noble Lord who had just sat down in
condemning the income-tax as a permanent impost. He re-
ferred to a passage in the books of Mr. M'Culloch, in which
that ecenomic philosopher had shown that it would be great in-
justice to subject income from land to a peculiar tax, as that
would be a bar to al: improvement. Capital was the chief in-
gredient in the improvement of a nstion, and any tax upon ca-
pital—whether that capital ea: represented las land or by raw
material of any other kind—or engaged in commerce—was
inevitably a check . upon improvement. He agreed
with the Noble Lord opposite, that a tax upon income
should only be resorted to in times of great emergency.
—( Hear, hear.) In the whole of the financial arrangements
of the Government the great matter which he regietted was
their inattention to the debt of the country. That was the
great incubus upon the in ustry of the country. Surly it
should have been the duty of the Government—of every succeed-
ing Government—to relieve the country from that heavy
weight. Whilst the debt remained in its present amount,
what resource would the country have if a war arose ? Nothing
co Id be done but borrow.—( Hear, and a laugh.) The country
could only do as Falstaff did in the tavern—" score up." For
his part he should never feel comfortable unless he saw some
tax imposed for the purpose of grappling with the debt. That
was a comfort which, at his time of life, he could scarcely hope
to enjoy.—( A laugh.) He had. however, great happiness in
saying that, in the whole course of hislong life, he had never seen
the country in a happier state of quiet and comfort. There was not
a speck in the horizon, except in the small territory of Oregon.
—( A laugh.) Yet, he could not but express his regret that
nothing was done to get rid of the debt. He would not deny
that the sinking fund had failed to a great extent of its object,
but it ought to have been sustained as a means of reducing the
amount of the debt, and of facilitating the system of borrowing,
if a resort to that system should become necessary. This was
a year of unexampled prosperity Nothing could be a greater
mistake than to suppose that the laws of any Government can
prevent those alterations which will assuredly ever he experi-
enced in commercial affairs. With respect to the banking
measures for which his Noble Friend had taken so much credit,
he thought that they might possibly have done no harm. But
his great objection was to the disposal of the surplus, and he
thought the better plan would be to prevent any surplus at a
future period.
Lord STANLEY said that he thought that his Noble Friend
had hardly done justice to the efforts which had been
made by her Majesty's Government. His Noble Friend
had complained that his Right Honourable Friend
at the head of the Treasury had made no effectual relief for
the pressure of the, debt. It might be true that no actual re-
duction in the amount of the debt had made place, but the in-
tersst of the debt in 1828 was upwards of 39,000,000/., and
now it was only 28,000 0001. ; and here there was a reduc-
tion of not less than 4,000,000 L, which was equal to not less
than 1,000,0001. Yet this was not all, for by a burden with
which they had saddled themselves now for the benefit of
the future, in 1654, by the cessation of the terminable
annuities, there would be a reduction of above 650,0001 in
the annual interest. Ist 1864 there would be a reduction fur-
ther by the cessation of the long annuities of above 1,2000001.
a year ; and in 1,465 there would be a stilt further reeuction
of above 200,0001. a year, and he thought that this was a re-
duction which went very largely to reduet: the debt. But his
Noble Friend had said that he had no objectnen to a surplus at
present, but he did object to the imposition pt that tax by
which the surplus was created. Why it was a fact well
known, that his Right Honourable Friend at the
head of the Government had clearly shown that,
without the income-tax, instead of a surplus, there
would, in 1846, absolutely be a deficiency.—( Hear.) It
was evident that a surplus of 3,000 000/. or 4,000,0001. was
necessary. The Noble Maequis opposite objected to the im-
position of this tax. beeau.e he said that he bed an objection to
their imposition of this tax, and yet he wished that there
should be no deficiency, that. they might not have to say,
"score up hostess." Why the very first object which they
had in view in the imposition of this tax was to pay off the
score which the Government, of which the Noble Marquis
was a member, had run up; and by this tax they .had sotonly been able to pay off that aeon., to the rune of 7 li°°l •
a year, but at the same time to grant very large relief to L'e
c mweree of the ciun ry. So that this tax. which the Nobl#
Marquis so grievously complained of, had enabled them to in
ereass coniamoton, and, at the tam time, to clink th;

HI)USE OF CO.VMONS. April 4.
The SPEAK took the Chair at Four o'clock.
SECOND READINGS.

smuggler by remitting duties, which raised the article of tea, Bill, and the Harrocate and Ripon Junction Railway Bill, were
for instance, to a rice which induced the contraband tevestally read a second time.
introduction of it. The consumption of that article had Mr. T. DUN Ut ,il IsE Cave notice that he should, on the
increased fully one-fourth within the last five years. .Agittn, motion for the third reading of the last of these hills, move
if they took the article fif tobacco, they would find that the that it be le rd a third time that day s'x months.
reduction of the duty upon tobacco had led to a very lei ge in- LIVERPOt L AND BURY RAILWAY.
crease in the consurnittien of the article. In 1841 the (pi ~ntity The Bill fur this rale ay was brought in and read a first
introduced was ; in 1843 it was :3,605 0001bs. ; time, ou the meti,lt of ti•e Earl of LIS lOW EL.
and in 1814 it was 3.863,0001bs So that it api.eared the im- SPARROW:,EIERtiE ROAD.
position of this tax hail enabled them largely to relieve the The Bill for thi- read was read a third tie.e and pasted.
trade of the country. They proposed no le•s a reduction than i LOW ESTOFF RAILS AY AND HARBOUR.
3,e00,000/ , and the Noble Lord himself had stated that a This Bill was read a second tone, arid ordered to be corn•
better selection of ar'icics on which to remit duty could not be mitted.
made than that they had adepted. In the price of sugar they
had effected a larger reduction than was contemplated in the
celebrated sch,ine of the Ni.ble Lord opposite. He had nut
heard any one complain that the en'ire teducti n of the duty
on glees had given a great stimulus to the manufacture. If
they had not taken the duty off glass the manufacture would
year by year have gradually decreased, and the duty upon it
could not have been relied upon as a source of revenue. Be
had not heard, even in the daily papers or anywhere else, still
less in their Lordship's House, that the relief which they had
granted was tale which would tiot largely tend to promote
the commerce of the country and promote the con-
sumption and the comfort of the peoele.—( Hear. )
Another impertant tax which had been passed over by the
Noble Lord was the 600,0h0/. imposed on the importation of
raw cotton. Was thu re a. more objectionable tax than that ? It
pressed heavily on the manufacturer, and its removal had long
been looked for by the country. Well, then, without the im-
position of an income-tax the Government cou d never have
ventured upon there important financial changes. It was
said, that the tax wss popular with those who did not pay it,
but those who spoke in those terms forgot that all our former
systems of taxation had reached their maximum, and those
upon whom they were imposed were unable to bear them.
Were the Government to blame, then, for removing the
burden of the chief taxes to those who were well aide to
bear them ?—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Marquis had
said that the property-tax was not only grossly unjust in
principle but grossly unequal of its operation. Why,
where could they find a tax which was not in some respects
unequal in its operation ? All taxation must bear differently
upon those who have a permanent and those who have only a
temporary interest in property, and in these two instances he
could hardly see how the tax could operate with any great
degree of int quality. If the tax were raised now to remove a
debt some tenor twenty years hence he should agree with the
Noble Marquis in thinking it was partial and unjust to tax an
annuitant, but where the tax was made to meet the current
expenses of the current year, and levied upon the current
income of an individual, he could not comprehend
the argument which went to show that the tax was either
unequal or partial in its operation. At all events, he should
sit down convinced that a property- tax was the best and the
most equitable which they could impose upon the nation, for
removing what appeared to him to be a permanent deficiency
in the revenue.
Lord MONTEAGLE reminded their Lordships that, when
the national debt was contracted, the assessed property of the
country amounted to 56,000,0001. Since then it had increased
to 186,000,, 00/. ; and they were nos about to tax parties to
meet the charges of a debt, from which those parties
had never derived any interest.—(Hoar.) He had heard
many ingenious calculations, ba-ed upon the resources of this
country, but he was convinced of this, the resources of the
country bad never been greater whether in a time of war or
peace than they were now. He was inclined to praise some of
the selections which the Government had made in the articles
upon which they proposed to remove the duty. The article
of glass was a very important one, and he had no
doubt great benefits would result to the country from the se-
movel of the tax hitherto imposed upon it. But they were
net to discuss a property-tax in a commercial point of view.
It was in a financial point of view they must examine into it,
and he must say, looking at it in this light, it was founded upon
a fallacious and dangerous doctrine which was calculated to
cause great mischief out of doors if not to j. opardise the peace
of the country. There never was a more needless sacrifice of
revenue than the giving up of the auction duties. The sacri-
fice had not been called for. How could it be expected that
the repeal of the excise duties would promote consumption so
much as to compensate for the losses to the revenue? The Go
vernmeiit of a tuture day would he compelled to yield to the
demands of the country. He believed that the labourers of the
country were as much interested in opposing this tax a- the
richest and most fully endowed. When he com-
pared the estimates of the year 1635, under the
same rime Minister, with the estimates of the present year,
he could not help stating that no good rea-on had been given
for the increase. With respect to the sugar duties, he could
see no reason for the measures of the Government. All the
authorities of any value upon the s:uestion, were against the
arguments all gest by the Government in favour of its own
measure. With respect to sugar you lose a million and a
hail; the President of the Board of Trade stated the sum of
two mill ons The very classification, the ve. y system, was
adopted from the paper prepared by Mr. Hume, which had been
called a riginarele payer. They lost by the timber duties up-
wards of 600,000/., and by the sugar that. which made
up a loss of two niiiiions and a half. The way in which they
had dealt with corn had dimieislisd the it resources. In corn,
sugar, and ti ber, there appeared to be a fatality ; and it
seemed by the pamphlet which Mr. Gladstone had written,
that there was r 'eduction of one-half the aniouot of duty.
He was quite peened to discuss he question as one of
econom:cal -cienve, and he thought that in that principle the
Government had mistaken the course they ought to pui su
Lord ASHBUBT N raid, his Noble Friend had riot an.
swered his objection, for he thought the erinciple of a
sinking fund, of that which was equivalent to a sinking fund,
was the diminution of the principal, and not merely the in-
terest of a debt.
The Duke of RICHMOND said that he did not object so
much to the vote, as to the appropriation of the funds which
are to be supplied by it. His iNoble Friend had allowed, that
he was totally ignorant of the nature of some of the it« ms in
the list el duties which he was prepared to reduce. Now, he
thought, that if reduction were to be made, is ought to be
made in some of the articles in which benefits
would accrue to the agricultural interests.—( Hear.)
But what did they do? They imposed a rate upon a farmer,
so that if tie had 300/. a year rent, they taxed him after the
rate of obtaining 1501. profit—but what was the ease? An in-
dividual who had last year had an interview wall Sir Robert
asses, es lA.f9, Lao /bawd loot 0001., larttl ire levee
he had lost 701)1. He was assured that the distress in the
country had been occasioned by the measures of the last three
years. The Right Hon. Baronet had come into office on the
suppesition that the agricultural interest would be taken care
of; but he would be glad to know what would be the opinion
now, if the country were called upon to express it. One thine
surprised him, that every body talked against the Bill, but
every one resolved to vote for it. This was very strange,
but still it was a fact, that without the tax they
would nut have the surplus which appeared requisite for the
necessities of the country.
Lord BROUGHAM complained that the debate had been a
most svearisoa+e one, and he thought it was a bad system to
use so many figures in speaking of a subject like this. He had
waited an hour and a half in anticipation of this debate, but
they had heard all about everything but the precise point in
question. It reminded him of an anecdote of a great states-
man, who had expended, like all other Chancellors and ex-
Chancellors of the Exchequer, a great deal of labour in getting
together a series of calculations, and he went to Lord Lauder-
dale, who advised him to throw his figures altogether over-
board, just as he would throw physic to the dogs. The Noble
ex-Chancellor was, of course, in an agony of disappointment,
but still the advice was good, and it it had been followed, it
might have saved a good deal • f the wearisomeness of this
debate. He must say that, notwithstanding the objections to
this tax, still he was prepared to vote for it, as he had
done in the first instance for the fist three years on
tne ground of necessity ; and in the second instance on the
ground of something very like necessity. In the abstract, and
indeed in practice, there were great objections to the impo-
sition of a property-tax, especially for a permanency. That
there were objections also to ineirect taxes, he was perfectly
aware ; any attempt to press upon the means of consumption
must press upon the erijeyments of those classes to whom the
comforts thus restricted were everything. Yet, notwiths end-
ing this, he still deemed it necessary to refute the supposi ion
that thus tax, or indeesb, any dii ect tax, could fall equally on
property. It was one of the essential elements of property
that it should be unequal, and he thought that whet, the tine-
ginatien of his Noble Friend was int-heed to be active, it would
nut be a bad plan if he were to call his juegment into his aid to
render his lucubrations as useful as the detail of the in was effective.
He regretted that Mr. Pitt did nut take, in the time of the
war, long annuities, instead of contracting an alrno-t lasting
debt. If that had been done the country would not new have
been in such a condition as to :ender either an income or a
property-tax necessary. Improvements might be introduced
into the Bill under discussion, but he thought the country
would bear the is convenience of the measure in its present
state, fully relying upon the intent ion of Govern-
ment to discontinue it at the expiration.. of three years.
The country he was convinced would never object to an income-
tax in a time of war, or when large funds were required to de-
ftnd its honour. But God forbid that the present peace should
be disturbed ; but knowing the frailty and vicissitudes of hu-
manity, he could not conceal irons himself that a time might
come when it might be necessary for the Country
tineiefehtemewaosf
its rights or its honour to resort to arms, a
satisfied the people would cheerfully pay not only
an income-tax, amounting to three, but to ten per cees.
He trusted that the seutienents he has; seen in the President's
message would be le pudiated by the American people; butt if
they were not, he retied upon the British Government's adopt-
ing measures to vindicate the national honour, and they might
depend upon England contributing a liberal income and pro-
perty-tax to aid them in doing so. Should, however, no extra-
ordinary steps be necessary, it was the duty of Government to
keep the tax down as much as possible; and should it be found
necessary to continue it at the expiration of the three years,
such modifications ought to be introduced into it as would make
it less inquisitorial and less painful to the great body of the
people.
he Marquis of NORMANBY had strong objections to the
continuance of the property-tax, because sanctioning it a
second time looked very much like snaking it a permanent tax.
At the termination of the Chinese war, it was held out to them
that the increase it would occasion to the commerce of the
country would have the effect of removing the income and
property-taxes, and he could see no reason why this principle
should not be now fultilled. He did not think that the other
deductions of taxation were equivalent to the increase of impost
upon this tax. He, therefore, opposed the proposition of the
Government, and would say " non-content.'
The Earl of RADNOR would also say " non-content" to
the imposition of this tax, because it was unequal, unjust, and
inquisitorial, in its operation. He contended that, in all
seasons of agricultural depression, the laws were chiefly in
fault. He objected to the tax because it was unjust and
oppressive. He would not object to an income-tax if it were
fairly apportioned. He did not think that it could be so. But
he was convinced that it e iold not be brought forward in a
more objectionable shape than the present.
The Duke of RICHMOND moved an amendment, as a
rider to the Bill, " that, in the even+ of farmers suffering a loss
through a bad harvest, they should have a power of appeal
against the assessment of the tax.
Lord STANLEY thought the Noble Lord's proposition un-
reasonable, because it was impossible to make such distinction.
The Duke of RIC HM ON I) would rather have the inquisitorial
power than the real loss. He objected that they were obliged
to ascertain their losses, and he thought it very hard if a man
incurred a loss that he should pay as if it wete profit. He
would not divide the House upon it, because he thought it
would be useless to do so. Yet he knew that it was competent
for them to alter a money bill, and, with the present power of
the Government, he was convinced that the Right Hon.
Baronet at the head of the Treasury would be very well able to
make any alteration he pleased in the Bill.
The Marquis of NORMANBY said that. he agreed with
the Noble Duke that this was the csowning iniquity of the
Bill ; and though lie was among the non-contents of the Bit
he would not divide the House on this occasion,
The amendment was then put and negatived.
The Bill was then read a third time, arid passed ; and their
Lordships adjourned at a quarter to Twelve o'clock.

GRANT TO MAYNOOTH.
Mr Parnell, Mt. rirotherton. Mr Hamilton, Col. Acton.
Mr. Aglionhy. tr. Stuart ortley, Mr. Bailey, Mr. Divrtt,
Mr. Palmer, Dr Itimring, and s veral other Hon. Alenibers
pr, svnreci petitions from variiius places, against any additional
grant to Maymmth.
CHURCH EDUCATION.
Mr. BATESON presented a petition from the county of
Derry, in favour of the grant for Church education in Ireland.
JEWISH DISABILITIES BILL.
Dr. BOWE{ INC; presented a petition from the Unitarians of
Bolton in favour of this Bill, and praying the House nut to
throw impediments in its way, but to still further extend the
spirit of toleration which had dictated it.
SAWYERS.

Mr. SPOONER presented a petition from the sawyers of Bir•
mingham complaining of the present system of importing from
America, into this country. ready-cut board,, free of duty, and
praying the House to appoint a select committee to inquire
into its operation upon the operative sawyers of the country.
Air. COLVILE presented several petitions from Derbyshire
against the grant to the Colleae of Alaynooth.
The Stimechurch Roast Bill was read a second time.
MEDICAL BILL.
Air. MAN( LES said that he presented a petition last night
from a nu,erous binly of medical practitioners in several towns
in surrey. praying for some alteration in the Medical Reform
Bill introduced by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of
State for the Home Department. He wished to put the House
in po session of the motives by which these gentlemen were
actuated.
The SPEAKER said the Hun. Gentleman was clearly
out of order in attempting to refer to petitions when there was
nu debate.
Mr. MANGLES said that if he were prevented from stat-
ing the opinions of those for whom he had acted, he would beg
to give notice that he should move certain amendments on the
Medical Reform Bill in Committee..
MAYNOOTH.

Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE presented two petitions against
any increase in the grant to the College of Nlaynooth. They
were numerously signed, and were untainted by any spirit of
exclusiveness; but they deemed that any ecclesiastical esta-
blishment was an unconstitutional imposition, and they prayed
the House to modify or reduce the grant.
Mr. HINDLEY said he had presented several petitions
against the grant to Maynooth last night, and he now had to
present seventy more. He would not trouble the House with
reading the titles of these petitions, for he did not expect they
would be of the smallest avail, but he conceived that it was
necessary to present them in order to put the House in pa-
,ession of the feelings of the country. The parties who bad
signed these petitions were not induced by any disposition to
the " No Popery " cry, but because they conscientiously be-
lieved that any State support to ecclesiastical establishments
was bad in pi inciple.

RAILWAYS.
Mr. STUART WORTL E , seeing the Honourable
Member for Oxford in his place, bi Aged to ask him when they
might expect a notification of the seiection of Committees for
railways, and in what order they meant to classify the Bills.
Mr. ES [COURT said that the day on which the House se-
parated before the recess, the loth of March, was the very'
earliest day on which any decision could be come to. It was of
ciursecicar that some consideration was required after the House
met again before the result of that decision could be declared.
Hut he expected that the last would appear in the votes to'
morrow morning. With regard to the second portion of the
Hon. Member's question, it was impossible to say in what weir
ihe Bills would Le classified, fur their order must depend 011
;he busines c,f the Hi use.
RAILWAYS AND THE BOARD OF TRADE.
Mr. DUNCOM BE gays notice that, on Twisday next, be
could call attention to the Railway Department of the Board
of Tr,ida, with a view of preventing their inflicting further

injury oil both public and private interests.
Oii the mot,ini of Mr. '1 UFN ELL a return of the number
of apprentices who have attended at each of the schools esta'
blished in her Maj.-sty's deck yards, during the year ending
December 31, 1014, was agr,..d to.
NEW ZEALAND.

Mr. FOS lER asked the Horourable Gentleman the
Under Secretary fix tl e Col,nlies if he had any objection to
lay on the table of the House the Government dispatches
received front New Zt lard on the lit inst. ?
Mr. H OPE thought the finuse would agree with tlist
him
these dispatches were for the information of Gov( or
merit and not for the information of Parliament. At the
same time, however, he could state that these difpatches were
all ready, and be had no objection to lay such parts of theta c'n
the table as the Ilt.use night wish to tee.
RAILWAY CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION .(SCOT•
_ _

The Newcastle-on-Tyne Coal Turn kill, the Glaspw and
Shots Read Bill, the Gla,geis Bridges Bill, the York Road
Bill, the Thames Watei works Bill, ihe it. Brien'. Canal Bill,

_ .
the !=l. I.leleu's. Impr(ovlnela Bill, the Blackburn Wateiwoeks
Bill, the thablin atv.DroAheda liall%ay Bill. the Wolv. rhamp.
' - Waterwtrk6 Bill; the Ennttlitlien and Dundalk Rai way
ton,

LAND) BILL.
Mr. LABOUCHERE wished to call the attention Of tbit
Lord Advocate t, a report which had gone abioad, to the etre
that•th.; Learned Lord had allowed an Hon. Member to add
clause to the Railway Clauses Coesolidat,on Bill of Scotlendo
without giving any previous notice of its nature, and at a tie!
when the Bill was in its last stage, and there ail;
necessarily but a small attendance of Members in
House. When he mentioned what the clause talt
he thought the House would agree with him, that it W 1;
oLe of considerable importance. The provision was no le"s,
than this—that every future railway to be constructed io Seer
land, should give an indemnity or guarantee to the landed Pr.e
•prietois of Scotland for any loss they might suatt,lo
through any turnpike- road being affected by ft.
const uction of the line. It had created considers
excitement in Scotland ; and he wished to know whether the
facts he lied stated were correct?
The LORD ADVOCATE said the clause was similar t.e,
one introduced into the Bill relating to England, and be di!
not think the Committee had sanctioned any „missal or oniul/
eisese. MR. MAZZINI.
Sir C. NAPIER ,aid that he perceived a statement in d'd
l
public newspaper declaring positively that Mr. Mazzini ha
nothing at all to do with that order for the murder at Rode*
which was alleged by the Right Hnn. Secretary for the Ho st
Depattment to have been signed by him. It appeared 641
the statements in the paper that the order was a forgery,
that Mr. Mazzini was not in France at the time the order tot
made. He wished, therefore, to ask the-Right Hon. garotts
if he stiil maintained his charge, or whether he was prepared
to follow the example of the Hon. Member for Shrewsblerl'
and make an apology to Mr. Mazzini ?
Sir J. GRAHAM said, that the Hon. and Gallant Oft,_eer
was not so obliging as to give him any notice of his intents_ri
to put such a question. He should have thought that be wewt.
have observed the ordinary rule of the House in such a reattta
But, as that rule had net been observed, he could scarce/ ,
expected to answer the question now. However, he woole!sfs•
this, that he had seen letters written by Mr. Martini, to leo
the question of the Hon. and Gallant Officer referred ; alwse-
( Sir J. Giaham) last night laid upon the table of the ne'as:
by command of her Majesty, certain papers which bore sa,
reedy upon this question. The House would remember t"-p
when he was making his statement to it upon this ouestio s •
he said distinctly that part of the accusation against afr.
situ did not re.t on official information, but on certain lette
which he ( Sir J. Graham) held in his hand.-4 Hear, he p,
He had heard that it was the intention of Mr. Menial to P, 0
secute the Moniteur newspaper for an alleged libel containeeiso
that paler, but that he did not follow it up; and be had to
heard that Mr. Mazzini did take an action against anot jo
paper for the san.e, and that he had not succeeded foe
proving the allegation. But he told the Hon. alemberloo,
Finsbury that he had never seen those letters or papers, os
therefore, could rot tell what the nature of the accusation 0,0%
—( Hear, hear.) He (Sir J. Graham) really knew o.tbleti,
more 01 the subject than this and what he had already 111,10 e
xceet that he had heard that the accusation in the Mosttate
was ill-founded ; but he should now say he was bound t°
esta go
that be cid Lot feel ju•titied in declaring that there W"'
foundation for the charge aiseinst Mr. Mazzini.
ViNOOl H COLLEGE. etioe
Mr. VILLIERS begged to know when it was the in
L'" es' fer
of the Right 11, n. Baronet opposite to introduce the be
the proposed inereas.d grant to Majnonth ? The ieaSiT
asked the question tc,,a because he had been requested Iv
loge body of Dissentors to put off the second reading et
Bill tor a ortnight. of
Sir R. PEEL sai I that, in consequence of the resoluttlit.,
the House in teonimittee laSt night, in favour of the Bilis'. 'O6
Greene had receive,' (erections to prepare it; and. the ed
then fixed upon Friday next as the day upon which "the seer:rs,
reading of that Bill shouln take place, and it would, :there hot
receive a second reading on that day.—(Oppoeitimechee.tor
Mr. PLUMPTRE said he was requested to inquire *bet
the time for the second reading of the Bill might not be'
tended beyond Friday next ?
LORD ASHBURTON AND LORD J. RUSSELL:O
Lord J. RUSSELL said that he wished to ask a quest s,•
of the Hon. Gentleman, the Under Secretary of the Colon' is
on a subject which was personal to himself. He had Lege e
within toe last few hours a a atement, purporting to have tbite
made by Lord Ashburton with regard to a speech made by the
(Lord John Russell) on a late occasion. He would say, is,
first place, •hat a frieedship existed between him and Lorolo-ble
liurton, which friend•hip began when that in
Lord and himself were of the same opioileireee
polaacs—( Hear, hear, and a laugh)—and that the th' not
which had taken place in their political opinions b
et
interrupted the cordiality with which they always °lr/obl*
get, er whenever it was his good fortune to meet that eeishr
Lord, and that nothing was further from hit - to
in the discharge of his public duty,
say anything personally unkind of that Noble --.01
—( Hear.) In the course of the discussion on the pity
estimates a discussion, quite unexpected by him, arose ostb
regard to the treaty concluded by Lord Ashburton tied
America. That discussion was introduced by his Noble the,
near him, and, in consequence of what had fallen fro"- too
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, he (Lord John Russell) ted,
referred to a matter which he conceived to be correctlifrbsd
as far as his recollection on the subject served. ti 116
said that he thought it was advisable there sheuoso
some arrangement made by which the forces_ of *high
Britain and America should occupy a certain posttiel4assfes•
should be the boundary between the two bon
For that purpose he had instructed Lord SYdePor
to carry on negotiations with that object, with the rote
currence of his Noble Friend the Member for Tiato oot
Lord Sydenham informed him in his answer that he con."hols
obtain from Mr. Webster any terms other than terms hi,:f the
that part of the Madawaska settlement on the right banast was
river St. John should be occupied by the two Powneergs;roieisil
clear that Lord Ashburton supposed he (Lord J. 1093!e-sfarY,
luded to negotiation§ for a permanent settlement of the be 730,170
whereas—and he thought it was sufficiently ele Jr from w. to bo
had sail—he only alluded to a provisional arrangereen'eutioo
made between the two Governments. If it was the to p,,
of the Government to carry on any diplomatic
they would, of course, be carried on by his Noble Loon
and Lot himself, as the Noble Lord must have Under
All he wished to know was, if the Hon. Gentleman the f
Secretary for the Colonies, had received a copy
instructions which he (Lord John Russell) gr fis
Lord Sydenham, and his answer to isirne
spoke at the moment from memory, and did not an
rlasso
a discussion on what he then stated ; but the Noble 'Asses's,'
totally mistaken the whole transaction, for that Lord .7 cl
Lot-
ham could have made such observations seemed to himt l(Him
J. Russell) impossible. He wished to ask the Righr" nee is
Gentleman to produce the documents he had in refe
this subject. -
Lord
Mr. HOPE said he wasnot aware that the Noble ice ever,'
tended to put this question. He would, however, ,
search for the papers to which the Noble Lord referre•n_. alto
Lord JO erN RU'.SELL inquired if a corresponds ta.,00
taken place in respect to a provisional arrangement be""
the Colonial-office and Lord Sydenham? Rttlt
t
res lerc't tHo• b
ted
Mr. HUMEdis p
sailed thatr all connected OthFeEsauitd ttheerrei }
dispatcheshad been a correspondenee is
tb
dispute ought to te laid on the table of the House. pre
S r ROBERT PEEL -aid, if the documents even be
ah'
sieved without any injury to the public service. h beet!
objection to their production ; but this matter hare
settled between this country mad the United State", ta.T_T laid ooD
,
see why they should be produced. He did not tl?ffif.tte
public dint oald be atrAtied by thdr prodnatio• Ow'