The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-05 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 5, 1845.

Mr. COBDEN said that it was not easy to secure the
attention of Members to a private motion after Easter.
He had in the first instance given a fortnight's notice of
his motion ; he had then, at request, postponed it for
another fortnight, and afterwards for another week after
that. This was five weeks, and he could not, under these
circumstances, consent to postpone his motion.
Mr. WODEHOUSE said that he quite agreed with
the view taken by the Hon. Member for Stockport, and
under the circumstances he would not press his request.

present form so odious and unjust that he should move
as an amendment that the House do resolve itself into
Committee that day three months.
Mr. MINTZ wished to explain the reason why he
now opposed the proposition of the Right lien. Baronet
for the continuance of the property-tax, because having
voted for it when it was first proposed, because at that
time he deemed it expedient and just, he thought it is
duty to explain the reasons that now induced him
to vote against it. The circumstances of the
case wcre guise altered now from what they had been
when the Right Hon. Baronet proposed the tax ; and he
(Mr. Muntz) had voted for it on that occasion became
he had felt convinced that it was necessary either to im-
pose this tax or tc levy an additional duty on articles of
general consumption. But the question was now
entirely alterered—the question now was, whether
you should take off that tax or any other tax ;
and while supporting the general proposition that the
imposition of a property tax was fair lied equitable, he
had a decided objection to this tax, because he consi-
dered an income-tax an injustice.—(Cheers.) The
more he considered the subject the more he was con-
firmed in this opinion ; and he had not met with a
gimr
ao
ns sy
peopleinjustice
paid
tahni ds t
ax hardshipho
single income-tax comrniss'oner who did not admit the
haodfnoanpropinecrotymoer-tainx:
come whatever fur the sake of keeping up appearances.
He begged it to be distinctly understood that he did not
object to a property-tax.—(Cheers.) They might
quadrupple a property-tax if they liked, he should not
object to it. But as the matter stood, he considered
the tax, as it at present existed, was most unjust.
Another reason why lie objected to the continuance of
this tax was, that not only the house, but the country,
were labouring under misconception on the subject of
the continuance of this tax. They, like the Right Hon.
Gentleman, were flattering themselves that, in thia
years time, they would get rid of this tax. They would
do no such thing. It would be perpetual.—(Hear, hear.)
Not only would they have to pay it for the rest of their
lives, but their children, their grandchildren, and their
great grandchildren would have to pay it after them.—
(Cheers and laughter.) Not only ware they continuing
the tax, but they were doing away with the means of
ever getting rid of it. If he agreed vs ith the Right
Hon. Barons that a permanent improvement had taken
place in the condition of the country, then he might,
perhaps, consider that there was some hope of the repeal
of the tax, but he entirely differed from the Right Hon.
Baronet on that point. It was true that an improvement
had taken place in certain districts, but it was evident
why that improvement had taken place. Additional
burdens had been put upon class, whieh had relieved
another. It was true the Right Honourable Baronet
had relieved the industrious classes belonging to the ma-
nufacturing interest ; but he had done this by laying
additional burdens upon the agricultural interest. "I
call this," said the Hon. Gentleman, " robbing Peter to
pay Paul "—(A laugh) but I want to know who
is to pay Peter ?—(Cheering, and much laughter.)
The Hon. Baronet said the other day that Sir Robert
Peel was a difficult bird to put salt on his tail, but it was
quite clear that the Right Hon. Baronet had put salt on
some of their tails.(Great laughter.) He did not
quarrel with the Right Hon. Baronet for entertaining the
opinions he did. He was willing to believe' that he was
sincere in them. He believed that the Right lion. Baronet
deceived himself, deceived the House, and deceived the
country.—(Renewed laughter.) lie (Mr. Muntz) ex-
pressed hi 3 sentiments straightforwardly and honestly, '
and felt no hesitation in saying that the income-tax
was a most vexatious, obnoxious, and inquisitorial tax,
and he would always vote against its imposition.
Mr. F. BARING said that if it were now a question
whether they would vote for an income tax or not, and
that their will was perfectly unembarrassed by the finan-
cial circumstances of the country, lie would oppose it.
But considering the position in which the country
stood, he believed it was preferable to other
modes of taxation. But the fact was, they had
no power to dispense with this tax. What was
the financial state of the country ? They ought
distinctly to understand whether or not they
had a surplus to deal with—whether they could
take of the tax or not. He (Mr. Baring)
did not think they could dispense with 5,000,0001.
The income for the year, without the China money and
the income-tax, was about 47,900,0001.; the expenditure,
as shown by the estimates, was about 49,700,000/.;
leaving a deficiency of 1,800,000/. He was speaking of
the condition of the finances of the country if they took
off the income-tax. He had heard it said on the other
side, that the resources of the country ought to leave a
margin to meet some of the casual expenses which fre-
quently came upon them. Now if they took that
into consideration, he did not believe that they
could get rid of the income•tax, without the imposition
of fresh taxes to the amount of two millions. That was
the present state of the finances of the country; and this
was his justification, and his only justification, for voting
far the income-tax. lie voted for it, because he was not
ready to leave the country again with a deficient revenue.
He would say that it was not wise, after having had re-
course to one of the strongest financial measures that
could be taken, to give up all the advantages which they
had gained by such a measure. He was ready to sub-
unit to any taunt for expressing this opinion, because ho
believed it to be a sound one. The Right Ilon. Gen-
tleman (Sir R. Peel) the other ntght had said that he
(Mr. Baring), and his friends around him, must
be in love with the income-tax because they did not
oppose it. (The Right Hon. Baronet expressed dissent.)
Why, the Right Hon. Baronet had said, " If you do not
like the income-tax, why do you not vote against it ?"
The Right Hon. Gentleman said, why don't you vote
against the Income-tax, or propose other taxes to meet
the trifling deficiency we have to make up ? Now, he
thought that was not fair, because it made a great
difference whether you oppose a tax which is already laid
on or whether you oppose it originally (Hear.) Hs had
a decided objection to the income-tax being made a part
of the permanent taxation of the country. lie had
constantly opposed it, because he thought it unwise,
and he would continue to oppose it ; but though
he retained all the objections which be had
expressed when the tax was originally laid on,
it did not follow that he was to oppose its continuant
for a further period of three years, when it was neces-
sary to meet the deficiencies of the country. It was
one thing to entertain strong objections to an income-
tax, and it was another thing not to oppose its continu-
ance for three years, particularly Iv hen there was a
deficiency of 2,500,0001. to be made up.—(Hear.)
He did not think it would be wise to make
any goat alterations in the way of taking off
taxes which would have to be imposed again if, as he
thought, the income-tax ought not to be a permanent
one. Assuming, then, that some tax was necessary, aad
that the continuance of the income-tax was requisite, he
would next come to consider what the propositions of
the Right lion. Gentleman were, and what was the
course he pursued having obtained his means, and
as it would be very difficult to argue the
case, without going into the whole of the
financial arrangements of the country with the Right
Hon. Gentleman, he hoped the House would pardon him
in asking for his attention for somewhat a longer period
than otherwise would have been necessary. And, in
the first place, lie sincerely regretted that the Right
Hon. Gentleman had left himself with so small a sur-
plus, about 90,0001. or 100,0001. He must say that that
seemed to him to be a small surplus to rely on. And
how did it rest ? On the sugar duties ?—(Hear, hear.)
And on what did the sugar duties rest ?—(Hear.) Why,
on the calculation that the consumption of sugar would
be increased nearly one-fifth beyond what was in the
year in which they had the greatest consumption, and
next, that that consumption would be supplied by the
coming in of certain sugars, at a higher rate of duty.
Now, what were the duties which the Right lion. Gen-
tleman would have to fall back upon? He wished not
to act unfriendly to the Right Hon. Gentleman, but if
the classification was to be abandoned be wanted to
know what was to become of the surplus. It was clear
that the Right Hon. Gentleman would not get the
amount of duty he expected for the sugar duties. He
was warned of that by the Right Hon. Gentleman the
late President of the Board of Trade. He now
came to the taxes that were proposed to be
taken off, and in doing so he admitted that they could
not take off any tax without being beneficial to the
country, but there were certain clases that would be more
rapidly affected than others. In the proposal of the
Right Hon. Gentleman he could not see any particular
charm.—(Hear, hear.) There could be no doubt that
the alteration of the sugar duties would be a great boon,
but the proposal that was made would not effect it.
He had made out a case differing materially from the
ordinary rule of financial arrangement ; but in that
arrangement he was supported by the common sense of
the country. They could not expect but that from their
reductions the same benefits would accrue as in other
caies of reduction. lie was afraid, however, that
the Right Honourable Gentleman was hampering him-
self by the principle he was adopting, and that
the advantages to the community would not be so great
as he expected. He (Mr. Baring) admitted that the re-
duction on glass would be a very great benefit. He did
not in the least conceal that. But it must be also under-
stood that he did not mean that it would confer a
direct benefit ; but he certainly admitted that indi-
rectly that reduction would be of very great advantage
to the poorer classes. lie believed that it would give a
considerable impetus to improvements, improvements of
very great extent, but some time must elapse ere its in-
fluence could cone into operation. There were other
duties remitted by the Right Honourable Baronet,
and he admitted here also that these reduc-
tions were calculated to benefit the country,
but he (Mr. Baring) should have proposed, in
preference to either of those reductions, the lowering of
the duty on soap ; for, as far as his opinion went, that
would have been found more beneficial for the working
classes. Still, no one could object to the taking off
of taxes, if they dealt with taxation merely in the
abstract. If they turned their eyes to those reductions
without comparing them with others which might have
been conceded instead, the measure of the Right Hon.
Baronet might be considered a very liberal one.
And with reference to those articles on which
tho duty had been remitted, would it not,
he asked, have been more advantageous for the classes
said to benefited, if those redactions had been made in
the poor man's tea, in his butter, in his soap, in his
cheese, in his tobacco, and in his coif, ? lie was
not so enamoured of the Right Honourable
Baronet's proposal as Many Honourable Gentlemen
on that side of the Muse had expressed themselves to
be. The Right Hon. Baronet had assured them that.
the income-tax would be taken off at the expiration of
three years. He doubted much wilt tiler, at the end of that
pried, the Right Hon. Baronet could perform his promise,
He had no doubt that the Right lion. Gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had a firm conviction
that he would be enabled to do
without that tax.
The Right Hon. Gentleman said, no man could speak
po4tively as to what might occur in three years hence,
Kit looking at the premises, he felt satisfied that the re-
venue would right itself before the expiration of that time.
When the Right lion. Gentleman used that language

he (Mr. Baring) confessed he did not entertain the
prospects he predicted were likely to arise. The Right
Hon. Gentleman turned to cerain years in which he said
they would find that so much taxation was taken
off, and in a short time afterwards the re-
venue tightened. Now, he begged the House to bear
in mind what the Right Hon. Gentleman's statement
was. The Rignt lion. Gentleman said, they intended
to take off taxes to the amount of three or four millions;
and in the course of three years, they expected their
revenue would by these means be increased
five miliion. Now, he (Mr. Baring) could not
entertain the same sanguine hopes. No man
had more confidence in the real power of the resources
of the country than he had.—(Hear. hear.) He never
had joined in the language of despondency which be had
occasionally heard indulged in by some Hon. Members
on his own side of the House ; but still he must
confess he could not now agree in the views
and opinions of the Right Hon. the Chancellor
of the Exchequer. The Right lion. Gentleman directed
at ention to the state of the revenue in 1816. He un-
derstood the Right Hon. Gentleman to say, that three
millions of taxes were taken off in that year, and the re-
sult was that in 1819 the revenue rightened. Now he could
find no common resources of information which could help
him to arrive at this conclusion.—(Hear.) The Right
lion. Gentleman tried to assimilate the circumstances of
1816 with the present time ; but the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman had entirely forgotten the income-tax which
existed at that time.—(llear, hear.) In the yeaa 1816,
the ordinary revenue paid into the Exchequer was
71,900,0001. Was that so ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—In-
cluding the income-tax.
Mr. F. BARING oontinued—Exactly so. He thought
the Right Right Honourable Gentleman had forgot-
ten the income• tax. Well then, in 1816 the ordinary
revenue was 71,900,000/. In 1819 the ordinary revenue
was 52,155,000/., being less 19,745,0001. He was afraid
the Right Honourable Gentleman would baldly be
able to say that this was a conciliatory result
for the first instance which the Right Honour-
able gentleman gave in support of his statement.
It was on these grounds that the Cabinet had taken up
their impression that the income-tax would be taken off
at the end of three ears. Other cases were more
clear. On the declination of trade in a bad year,
taxes were taken off to relieve it ; in another year,
trade revives and the revenue improved ; and then it
was said that this was the result of the remission of tax-
ation. To a certain extent he admitted this. But when
he came to look into the returns moved for by the
lion. Member for Carlisle, he did not see anything
to justify the position which the Government had taken
up, especially if they were to take the whole amount into
account. There were two proofs. They might
take the experience of the years 1822, 23, 24,
25, and 1826. During those years there was a
large amount of taxation taken off. In 1831, 32, 33, 34,
35, and 1836, there was also a large amount of taxation
taken off. If they were to take the average of the
revenue of 1820 and 1821, and compare it with
the average revenue of 1827, 28, and 1829, they
would find that there had been a reduction of about
13,000,0001.; but so far from the revenue having righted
itself from ordinary sources, in those years they would
find from these returns that there had been a loss
of not less than 4,000,0001. If they took the second
period of 1827, 1828, 1829, and compare it with
1837, 1838, and 1839 they would find that in the remis-
sion of taxes there had been a loss of 4,600,0001. If lion.
Gentlemen would refer to the returns moved for
by Sir William Clay they would find that the taxes taken
off between 1815 and 1830—they would find that taxes
to the amount of 18,000,0001, had been remitted, and
there had been a loss to the extent of
7,760,000/. in the ordinary sources of revenue.
The House would recollect that in the whole of
the Right Honourable Gentleman's explanation upon
this subject, he said that in taking off those taxes
be had proposed to remove, he would not only be con-
ferring a certain amount of relief on a large
portion of the community, but that he would be
borne out in doing so by the history of the acts of those
who had preceded him in office. From the year 1815
to the year 1833, about 33,000,000 of taxes had
been taken off, by I which no fewer than
22,000,0001. were lost to the country. Aad now he
would ask the Right Hon. Gentleman how he proposed
to persuade this House that in his financial statement he
meant to carry out the pledge he,had given relative
to the alleviation of taxes. There was one point
to which he (Mr. Baring) wished particularly to allude,
but that he considered it of importance he would not
trespass so long upon the patience of the House.
When first the Right Honourable Gentleman came
into office in the year 1842, he stated the means
by which he proposed to take off the income-
tax at the expiration of three years. He said he should
call upon both sides of the House to grant this income-
tax, and that, at the end of three years he would, with-
out charging the Whigs with any improper
expenditure of money, b. able to take
off a great amount of taxation by the reduction
of the army and navy.—(Hear, hear.) Now he
(Mr. Baring) had looked at the amount required for
defraying the expenses of those two great services of the
country, and he had compared the estimates of the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite for those services, with those of
the last year of " Whig mismanagement," and
he had found that the estimates of the Right lion. Gen-
tleman, in this item alone, exceeded by half a million
those of the last year of " Whig mismanagement." He
(Mr. Baring) hoped the Right lion. Geneeman would be
able to make out this part of his case to the satisfaction
of the House. He (111 r. Baring) did not complain of the
amount, if it should have been deemed necessary for the
sustainment of the honour of the country; on the contrary
he would not shrink from his share in the responsibility;
but he could not avoid saying that, after all they
had heard ;from the Hon. Gentleman of re-
duction of taxation ; and after the manner in
which the Whig party had been held up for " mis-
management " and " jobbing."—(Great laughter.)
it was not very satisfactory to have it announced that
half a million more would be required for this year for
the army and navy estimates than was demanded for
the same purpose during the last year of " Whig mis-
rule and mismanagement."—(Hear, heur, and a laugh.)
He would not trouble the House with any further ob-
servations.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then
rose, and was

(LEFT SPEAKING.)

PETITION from ST. GILES, READ-
ING, AGAINST INCREASING THE NAVY.

A petition from 1,121 of the inhabitants of St. Giles,
in Reading, was last week sent to London, for presenta-
tion to the House of Commons. The petition is as
follows :
" That your petitioners observe, with concern, that
thein same, a time
th of e pro-
foundex
tended commerce of the United Kingdom.
the Ministers of the Crown have proposed to Parliament
t o aug
peace—alleging,
theal
eNg
nvgy,
as a Estimates—nowre as
en
for
"Your petitioners are not aware of any branch of
honourable commerce that requires the aid of ships of
war—and they consider the proposed addition to the
Navy Estimates as a waste of the public money—and
likely to be regarded throughout these kingdoms as a
want of sympathy with the poorer classes of the com-
munity, under their oppressions and privations.
" Your petitioners further believe that the increase of
expenditure for the Nary will not be for the honour of
Parliament—a large number of the Members of the
House of Commons personally deriving emoluments
from the proceeds of the Navy and Army Estimates,
although acting as trustees for the people; and also by
improperly increasing Ministerial patronage.
" Your petitioners, therefore, beseech the House of
Commons that the proposed increase of the Navy Esti-
mates, amounting to one million of pounds sterling, or
thereabouts, may not take place, but that, in lieu thereof,
the duties levied on butter and cheese imported, and the
excise on soap, may be repealed."
.Note.—lt is stated that 152 military and naval officers
hare seats in this present Parliament!

TUESDAY-NIGHT'S GAZETTE.
DIVIDENDS DECLARED.
R. Robinson, coal merchant, Strand—first div. of 2s. in the
pound, on Saturday, March 8, and three following Saturdays,
at the office of Mr. Groom, Abchurch-lane.
J. Langhorn, banker, Berwick-upon-Tweed-211.5t div. of
108. in the pound, on any Saturday after March 1, at the
office of Mr. Baker, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
T. Dunn, grocer,Newcastle-upon- Tyne—first and final div.
of 6s. sid. in the pound, on any Saturday after March 1, at
the office of Mr. Baker, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
W. Cock, grocer, Bungay, Suffolk—tifth div. of id. in the
pound, on Wednesday, March 5, or any subsequent Wednes-
day, at the office of Mr. Follett, Sambrook-court, Basinghall-
street.
J. 11. Denison, Nelson-square, Blackfriars-road—first div.
of Cs. in the pound, on any Saturday, at the office of Mr.
Green, Aldermanbury.
M. W. Vardy, bookseller, Newbury, Berkshire—first div.
of Bs. in the pound on new proofs, and second div. of 3d. in the
pound on all proofs, on any Wednesday, at the office of Mr.
Graham, Coleman-street.
S. Eccles, cotton manufacturer, Manchester—first div. of
Bs. 41(1. in the pound, on Wednesday, March 5, cad every
following Wednesday, at the effice of Mr. Pott, Manchester.
C. Riding, cotton manufacturer, Manchester—first div. of
Is. 4id. in the pound, on Wednesday, March 5, and every
following Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Pott, Manchester.
J. Coles, jeweller, New Bond-street—first div. of Bs. ld. in
the pound, on any Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Graham,
Coleman-street.
S. Eccles and C. Riding, cotton manufacturers, Manchester
—first div. of 9s. 6d. in the pound, on Wednesday, March 5,
and every following Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Pott,
Manchester.
M. Martin, upholsterer, Bristol—first div. of 9d. in the
pound, on Monday, March 10, and any subsequent Monday,
at the office of Mr. Miller, Bristol.
R. B. Palmer, watch maker, Bath—first div. of 3s. 4d. in
the pound, on Monday, March 10, and any subsequent
Monday, at the office of Mr. Miller, Bristol.
W. Charters and P. Charters, tea dealers, Merthyr Tvdvil,
Glamorganshire—first div. of 2s. 10d. in the pound, on
Monday, March 10, and any subsequent Monday, at the office
of Mr. Miller, Bristol.
T. Parr, painter, Liverpool—first div. of Is. 6d. in the
pound, on Thursday, March 6, at the office of Mr. Cazenove,
Liverpool.
W. A. Mearns, brewer, Acre-lane, Clapham—first div. of
Is. 3d. in the pound, on Saturday, March 8, at the office of
Mr. Groom, Abchurch- lane.
W. L. Dore, innkeeper, Egham, Surrey—first and final
div. of 4s. 2d. in the pound, on any Saturday, at the office
of Mr. Green, Aldermanbury.
DIVIDENDS.
At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street.
R. Graves, saddler, Edward-street, Portman-square, o
squarze,cMl ,rarch
25, at half-past two—T. 11. lord, victualler,
Essex, March 28, at twelve-IW. W.00d,1. R. Smith,
and J. Stein, bankers, Workington, March 20, at two.
In the Country.
W. Roberts, jun , merchant, Calverley, Yorkshire, April 8,
at eleven, at the Leeds District Court—W. Schofield, machine
maker, Oldham, Lauctuhire, March 29, at twelve, at the Blau-

chester District Court—W. Walker, hatter, Birmingham
' April 5, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court—J.
sen , W. Newton, J. Wilson, jun., H. Newton, and G.
Wilson, colour manufacturers, Derby, April 5, at eleven, at
the Birmingham District Court—G. Harvey, spirit merchant,
Handsacre, Staffordshire, April 5, at twelve, at the Birming-
ham District Court—M. Cooley, tailor, Spalding, Lincoln-
shire, April 5, at half-past eleven, at the Birmingham Dis-
trict Court—R. R. Timings, grocer, Birmingham, April 5, at
half-past twelve, at the Birmingham District Court—R.
Thelwell, silversmith, Manchester, March 15, at eleven, at
the Manchester District Court—C. D. Broughton and J. J.
Garnett, bankers, Nantwich, Cheshire, March 25, at twelve,
at the Liverpool District Court.
CERTIFICATES to be granted, unless cause be shown to
the contrary, on the day herein mentioned.
A. N. Armani, merchant, Scott's-yard, Bush-lane, March
25—H. D. Williams, plumber, Southampton, March 25—J.
Martin, tallow -chandler, High-street, Shoreditch, March 28
—A. Brideson, cheesemonger, Clare-street, Clare-market,
April I—W. Valiance, merchant, Liverpool, March 25
T. G. Martin, wine merchant, Cold. harbour-lane, Camber-
well, March 25—W. Oliver, printer, Darlington, Durham,
March 25—H. D. Watkins and J. Innes, lead merchants,
Manchester, March 25—T. llodgson, calico printer, Man-
chester, March 25—T. Sedgwick, grocer, Leeds, March 25
T. Wright, earthenware manufacturer, Turista, March 25
—T. Swift and J. A. Hensman, bill brokers, Copthall-court,
Throgmorton. street, March 25.
PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.

J. Bath and W. Estwick, paper stainers, Charles-street,
Drury-lane—J. Ormiston and T. Backhouse, carriage makers,
Sheffield—J. Silcock and N. Lowe, plane manufacturers, Bir,
mingham—T. and H. Taylor, booksellers, Liverpool—C.
Ironside and J. Napier, Liverpool—W. Moore and J. GatElf,
share brokers, Huddersfield—S. Brabner and J. Atkinson,
attorneys, Liverpool—J. Ingo, W. Docg, 11. Pratt, and
W. S. Haswell, ship brokers, Newcastle-upon-Tyne—C. and
W. J. Cross, commission agents, Manchester—G. Wilson and
J. T. Nottle, ironmongers, Hartlepool, Durham—T. C. Gibson
and G. Burnett, coal litters, Newcastle-on-Tyne—G. Glan-
vile and G. Plummer' linen drapers, Leeds—T-. M. and 11. G.
Sutton, insurance brokers, Liverpool—J. Maxey and W.
Doughty, cabinet makers, Maidenhead, Berkshire—R. Leach
and S. Taylor, cotton-waste dealers, Bury, Lancashire—E. P.
Turner, and E. P. Turner, jun., coal merchants, Birmingham
—J. Cripps and H. Kemp, drapers, Leicester—J. Walker and
W. E. Boddinton, surgeons, Chesterfield—W. Rawlins and
R. Adkins, coach makers, Leighton Buzzard, Bedfordshire—
W. Thomas and D. Rees, limeburners, Swansea, Glamorgan.
shire—J. Passman and J. Storey, curriers, Stockton-upon-
Tees, Durham—W. Bagshaw and T. Rogers, timber dealers,
Liverpool.
SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS.

William Gerrie, grain dealer, Rothemay, Banffshire, March
11 and April 1, at twelve, at the Banff Hotel, Banff.
James Young. innkeeper, Laurieston, Edinburgh, March
11 and 28, at twelve, at Fraser's Rooms, Edinburgh.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, March 4.
LAW OF DEBTOR AN]) CREDITOR.

Lord BROUGHAM said that he had not di;wn up
the Bill. It had been drawn up by one of the Judges,
and the incapacity to interpret it had been on the part of
another learned judge.—(A laugh.) Notwithstanding
all that the Noble Lord had said, he still thought that it
was necessary to give credit, and if the creditor was
called upon to endure this risk, he ought in fair justice
to have a corresponding security. Now, he would vul-
ture to assert, and he did it without any intention to
offend, that their Lordships all went upon credit. lie
thought he might say, without fear of contradiction,
that there were few of their Lordships, if there were
any—and he did not believe that there were—who paid
their bills oftener than once a year. It was a custom
that had grown upon the country, and therefore no man
was to be blamed for abiding by it. But still, at the
same time, he must say that example was a powerful
thing, and the system went through the several grades
of society until it reached that class whose means were
of a very different order, and lie believed, therefore, it
was necessary to find a remedy, so as to give a means of
satisfaction to the ercditor for small debts; that was, the
Bill went too far. No honest debtor would suffer a re-
straint upon his person in order to preserve his goods
and prevent the payment of his creditor. On those
grounds he trusted that their Lordships would express
no indisposition for a revision of this measure, and in
some way give effect to the terms of the petition.
Lord CAMPBELL was not indisposed to give every
necessary remedy to the creditor, but it was not to be
supposed that credit should not be given. The world
could not go on without it ; but be did not believe that
giving a creditor the power of imprisoring his debtor
would avoid the evil of which the Noble Lord had com-
plained.