The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-12 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH l2, 1845.

to the removal of the nuisance, it was generally felt
that it was very possible to effect it, if the House
would but provide the necessary powers ; and it might
be done without any great inconvenience to the
public. He thought the subject could not be satis-
factorily settled unless it was referred to a Select
Committee of the House. He hoped the Noble Lord
would consent to the second reading of the Bill, and
then it might be referred to a Select Committee.
Sir R. PEEL said a Committee was appointed last
year, but it appeared that no one had read the report,
and the subject seemed nearly forgotten. He would
suggest that Hon. Members should read the report of
the last Committee, and then they would be able to
judge if any further evidence was required. The
Hon. Member for Finsbury seemed to have spoken
under the impression that there had been no report.
Mr. HAWES said, the Select Committee ought
to be appointed on the present Bill. As to the report
of the Committee itself, he had a perfect know ledge
of its contents.
Sir W. CL AY thought any measure on the sub-
ject ought to emanate from Government. The
smoke was discolouring all the magnificent piazzas
and porticos of the public buildings, and the beautiful
architecture of the new Houses of Parliament would
speedily suffer from its damaging influence. The
public were most anxious for effectual legislation on
the subject.
Mr. BRIGHT said there was a general feeling that
the settlement of this question was a very easy
matter. The Right Hon. Baronet at the head of
the Government recommended Hon. Members to
read the report of the last Committee; but he (Mr.
Bright) thought that the perusal of that report only
showed the extreme difficulty of legislation. No doubt
parties had been examined before it who said it was a
very easy matter, but this was the evidence of inte-
rested individuals—persons who had inventions to
dispose of, and on whose testimony but little reliance
could be placed. The expenses of attending these
Committees had been alluded to, but there was only one
individual, the vicar of his (Mr. B.'s) parish, who asked
for his expenses. There was the greatest difference
of opinion as to the principle of the Bill, and no
lawyer in Westminster-hall could explain its mean-
ing. It sought to appoint inspectors who were
policemen ; and the fact was, that any common
constable would, if the Bill came into operation, be
in danger of having himself and others blown
up, for he would no sooner see a volume of opaque
smoke proceeding from a chimney, than he would
directly poke his nose into the engine-house, igno-
rant of the machinery and its operations. He thought
the House might employ itself much better than in
this meddling legislation, which never could be at-
tended with useful and permanent results. He trusted,
therefore, that the Hon. Member would withdraw this
Bill, and turn his attention to some more useful pro-
ject of legislation.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr MACKINNON was surprised to hear the ob-
servation that had fallen from the Hon. Member who
had just sat down ; and it was quite evident
he wa; not aware that a local Bill, having
precisely the same meaning as this, had for
some time been in operation in the towns of Man-
chester and Leeds; if he were, he could not, of course,
have said that this Bill could not be passed. Now
what was the real state of the case ? Whether the
Hon. Member opposed this Bill in order to please his
constituents, or for some personal motive, he (Mr.
Mackinnon) could not help saying that it did
appear to him rather extraordinary that he
(Mr. Bright) should oppose a Bill which he
had said he could not understand. Surely the Hon.
Member could not say that he would be willing to
lend his aid to the poisoning of the atmosphere, merely
because it would save him 301. or 401. for the altera-
tion of his chimneys. He believed there could not be
a second opinion that this was a nuisance which could
very easily be much abated. He should accede
to the request of his Hon. Friend, and postpone the
second reading of the Bill. He should certainly press
the second reading on Wednesday the 2d of April.
Mr. COBDEN said, the Honourable Member in
referring to the remarks made by his Honourable
Friend the Member for Durham had stated that the
provisions of this Bill were now in force in Man-
chester. Now, he believed the corporation of that
town had power to enforce similar provisions, but
they had postponed enforcing them until the present
month of March. His Hon. Friend had suggested
to the Hon. Member, and he would repeat the sugges-
tion, whether it might not be advisable to postpone this
measure until the result of the experiment about to
be made in Manchester had been ascertained. The
people of Manchester were favourable to putting dewn
the smoke nuisance, and the Hon. Member need not,
therefore, expect any opposition from that town.
After a few words of explanation from Sir R. PEEL
and Mr. MACKINNON, the second reading of the Bill
was postponed until the 2d of April.
PROPE RTY-T AX.
On the order of the day for the third reading of
this Bill being put,
Mr. WAKLEY rose and said that on a former
occasion when the property-tax was discussed the
Hon. Member for Lambeth had referred to some in-
justice which had been done by the Commissioners
to the Hon. Member for Oldham—he meant Mr.
Fielden. Since then he had received a letter from
the Hon. Member on the subject, and in order to
make the case complete, he would read an extract
from this letter to the House. The Hon. Member
stated that " We have been very unjustly treated
by the Commissioners ; we made a return to them for
the three years ending Dec., 1843, which return was
true ; but they were not satisfied with charging
us at 12,0001. as the profits on our trade, and they in-
creased the charge to 24,000 L We exhibited a return
to them, which showed that, in theaverage of the three
years they lost 24,0001. instead of gained that sum.
The Commissioners wished the case to stand over till
Easter, to which I assented ; but yet they have sent
in and demanded the money." Now, really the
operation of a tax of that kind was calculated to
create in the public mind the greatest possible discon-
tent. Every person must feel the injustice of it, and
though the amendments which had been pressed on
the House were rejected, he hoped that the Cern-
missioners residing in the country, who acted in this
outrageously unjust manner, would receive some
intimation from head- quarters which would check them
in their course. Nothing could be more monstrous
than this proceeding. Mr. Fielden had designated
it as a robbery. It might be sanctioned by law, but
it was nevertheless a robbery, and if there were any
parties who had; any general control over those
Commissioners, he trusted that some intimation would

But after Easter they make a subsequent demand of
the money.
Sir R. PEEL said that the Lords of the Treasury
were exceedingly desirous to obviate any inconve-
nience or unpleasantry to which those who had to
pay this tax were exposed. On the demand for the
money, and there being sufficient grounds for
objection, the party on whom the demand was
made might apply to two tribunals. If he under-
stood the question of the Hon. Member for Durham
(Mr. Bright), he conceived that the Act gave no
option of appeal. Now he (Sir Robert Peel)
thought that this was very important, and he
would take the opportunity of saying that the
Government were exceedingly anxious to avoid
the unpleasantry which all felt in having their private
circumstances investigated by their neighbours, and
had therefore felt objection to appointing local
Commissioners. And though they had every dis-
position to avoid the appointment of Government
assessors without absolute necessity, yet in , this
case it was conceived that their appointment
would be less objectionable than the institu-
tion of local assessors, and they had an additional
inducement to this course, from the supposition that
fraud against the Government, on the one hand, and
extortionate charge on the other, would both be ob-
viated. The Hon. Gentleman was in error in sup-
posing that there was an appeal, and if any one felt
that the assessors were likely to be actuated by local
prejudice, he was at liberty to appeal to the Special
Commissioners, so that if he suspected injury from one
tribunal, he was at liberty to appeal to another.
Mr. BRIGHT said that he was quite censcious
that there was this power of appeal, for he had himself
applied to the Special Commissioners. He had not
liked to be under the finger and thumb of the Local
Commissioners, as he well knew some of his neigh-
bours had been, and he had consequently applied to
the Special Commissioners, but the special Commis-
sioners, had discharged him, and he did believe that
the evil which had been complained of existed to a
great extent.
On the motion being put that this Bill be read a
third time,
Mr. SPOONER said he would beg to bring for-
ward the motion of which he had given notice, and
while doing so, he would beg to ask the indulgence
of the House. The clauses in the Act of Parlia-
ment to which he would refer affected a great
number of individuals, and as the hardship of which
he spoke was great, he trusted that no opposition to
the object which he had in view,... The clause which
he wished to insert was intended to relieve
those individuals who were engaged in business,
and who were assisted by members of their
family without giving them any regular salary
from the income-tax, and it was to this effect
1. And whereas by the said recited Act, it is pro-
vided in the first rule of Schedule (D), relating to
deductions, that no sum shall be set against or de-
ducted from the profits or gains arising under that
schedule for any disbursements or expenses of
maintainance of the parties, their families, or
establishments ; Be it Enacted, that from and
after the passing of this Act, whenever the
the person or persons so liable to be charged under
the said schedule shall employ any member or mem-
bers of his family in carrying on:his trade or profes-
sion, it shall be lawful to deduct such sum or sums of
money as would have been a fair remuneration for such
employment if any other person had been so employed.
Now that clause was construed to the following
effect :—That where a master of a family carried on
a small business, whether it was a shop or a manu.
factory, and employed the members of hii own
family, he was not entitled to deduct from
his profits the value of the labour of those
individuals. He admitted that there were exceptions
—that where a person was of adult age, and a
member of the family of the principal, if the prin-
cipal paid him a bona fide salary, he was en-
titled to make a deduction for such salary. But
he was not entitled to deduct the value of the
maintainance and labour of members of his own
family where no salary was paid. The grievance of
which he complained was this. He complained that
where the wife and the younger children of a trades-
man, or small manufacturer, were employed
principally in assisting in the conduct
of the business of such tradesman or
manufacturer, he was not entitled to make any de-
duction from his profits on account of their services.
[LEFT SPEAKING.]

TUESDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE.
WHITEHALL, MAucii..B.
The Queen has been pleased to grant to the Rev. James
Endell Tyler, 8.D., the place and dignity of a Canon Resi-
dentiary of the Cathedral Church of St. Paul, London, void
by the death of the Rev. Sydney Smith.
FOREIGN-OFFICE, MARCH 7.
The Queen has been pleased to approve of Mr. Joseph
Gordon, as Consul at Jamaica for his Majesty the King of
Prussia.
The Queen has else been pleased to approve of Mr. Robert
P. de Silver, as Consul at I Louis, in the Isle of France,
for the United States of America.
Commissions by the Lord-Lieutenant of the North Riding of
the County of York.
H. W. de la Poer Beresford, Esq., to be Deputy-Lieutenant ;
M. W. V. Milbank, Esq., to be ditto ; M. 'Wyvill, jun., Esq.,
to be ditto, March 8.

IRELAND.
DUBLIN, MARCH 10.—The weekly meeting of the Loyal
National Repeal Association held to-day was numerously
attended. Mr. O'Connell entered the Hall at half-past twelve
o'clock, and was greeted with enthusiasm. The,Hon. and
Learned Gentleman was accompanied by Mr. W. S. O'Brien,
M.P., John O'Connell, Esq., M.P., James Kelly, Esq., M.P.,
and R. Albert Fitzgerald, sq..
On the motion of Mr. O'CONNELL, seconded by W. S.
o'l3ninsr, the chair was taken by Alderman Kerhan, the
senior alderman of the city of Dublin.
The CHAIRMAN addressed the meeting briefly.
Mr. LIVINGSTON, a native of Nutport, county Mayo, but
now residing at Liverpool, handed in 51. 55., the renewed
subscription of Mr. John Langan, of that town; 51. ss. from
the members of his family; and 371. 145., the weekly sub-
scription of the Liverpool repealers.— (Cheers.)
Mr. O'Cosirsem, moved the hearty thanks of the Associa-
tion to Mr. Langan, who, he said, was as good a patriot as
ever stood in shoe-leather, had prospered in life, and was
ready to share that prosperity with his country by contri-
buting largely, indeed he might say munificently, for the
restoration of his native Parliament.
Mr. R. D. BRowNE seconded the motion, observing that no
man deserved more from his country than Mr. Langan, who
could show what an Irishman could do when opposed to the
Englishman.
Mr. O'CONNELL moved that four Glasgow Repealers be
icenexddtiecbuaydt
er
tdehf erg rieui ng
rego
mat
so: e
a.t
that exi
gproposition
h,
ym andhaida
oerbbraoyepnaMseird:
tion. He next adverted to the Land Commission, and re-
marked that it had been a total failure, and that its labours
were directed to prove what was
plain as the immortal
physiognomy of Lord Brougham himself, that Ireland was
inhabited by a people that were badly fed, badly clothed,
and badly housed. He next called upon the men of Ulster
to preserve, as they would their lives and honour, the
tenant-right of that province, and then said, in reference to
the visit of the Queen to Ireland, that the man who compro-
mised the right of domestic legislation in consequence of the
royal visit, was a traitor to his country. If this were offered
as a bribe to the Irish people, not by the Queen, but her
Ministers, it would be rejected.—(Hear.) Her whole natirre
would recoil from the base surrender of national right—by
men who would be satisfied with the substitute of scram-
blings for the crumbs which might fall from the royal table
at the Castle, or the lordly board of those who would be for
a while the resident nobility of Ireland. He begged of his
countrymen, however, to excel their proverbial courtesy and
gallantry, and uphold the hospitality of the Irish soil in the
reception which they would give the Queen. He was only
anxious that when her Majesty returned to England, she
would go back instinct with a knowledge of all the feelings
of the Irish. When her Majesty came to Ireland she would
be received as she deserved to be, with enthusiasm by the
Irish people.—(Loud cheers.)
Mr. O'CoNsama, here said, that the period had arrived
when they should send petitions to Parliament for repeal.
Although they did not expect that the Legislature would
soon grant the measure, petitions would serve as a sort of
caution to whatever wise statesmen succeeded the present
absurd Administration, and induce them to look to the state
of Ireland, and agree to thpeaceable agreement which they
(the repealers)
Mr. FITZGERALD, M.P., for Tippeary, having read a com-
munication from the country, observed, that in the recent
debate in the House of Lords, the Duke of Wellington was
reported to have uttered a very egregious falsehood, in de-
claring, that at no monster meeting held to advance the re-
peal cause was a single petition adopted. He (Mr. Fitzge-
rald) could give a most decided contradiction to that asser-
tion, for he had read and proposed a petition at the Cork
monster meeting.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that the Duke of Wellington was in-
capable of asserting what was positively untrue, and the re-
porter must have been mistaken on the occasion alluded to.
The matter was of such importance, that he would move, be-
fore the meeting rose, that a Committee be appointed to in-
quire and report upon the exact number of petitions which
had been adopted at the monster meetings held in Ireland.
Mr. W. S. O'BRIEN, M.P., then brought forward the se-
cond report of the Sub-Committee on the removal from Eng-
land of poor persons born in Ireland. There was at present
a Bill before the House of Commons relating to parochial
settlement in England, and it became the duty of the
Parliamentary Committee to say how the Irish people
would be affected by it.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable
Gentleman then read some extracts from the repOrt, enume-
rating instances of persons who had resided in England for
years being transported to Ireland because they applied for
parochial relief, and concluded by saying that, if they had an
Irish Parliament, their people would not have to go to Eng-
land to seek employment.—(Cheers.) He moved that the
report be adopted by the Association.
Mr. O'CONNELL, M.P., seconded the motion. It was fright-
ful to think of the cruelty which was practised under the
colour of the Poor-law Act. Of what country were these
facts related ? Was it of the Hottentot, or the barbarians of
Australia or New Zealand? No, it was of England.—(Hear,
hear.) Some of the newspapers accused him of hating Eng-
land. He had no hatred towards England, but he had the
most thorough hatred of the crimes perpetrated in the name
of that country.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman next
adverted to the inquiry between the Poor-law Commissioners
and the guardians of the South Dublin union in reference
to the appointment of a physician to the union.
Gentlemen connectod with the press had attended
at the Commissioners' inquiry, but Mr. Gilbert,
the Assistant-Commissioner, had all but kicked them out of
the room. He (Mr. O'Connell) had always been opposed to
the introduction of the poor-law into this country, even at
the risk of his popularity, and he would like to see the man
now who would vote for its continuance. The Honourable
and Learned Gentleman concluded by saying that the poor-
law should be either remodelled or repealed.—(Cheers.)
Mr. O'CosrsrEtz, in a lengthy speech, moved that the Com-
mittee appointed to draw up a report on the Land Commis-
sion report have leave to sit again.—Motion carried.
The rent for the week was announced to be 4771. 15s. 3d.
STOCK EXCHANGE, DUBLIN, MARCH 10.—Government
Three per Cent. Consols, 991,1 % ; Ditto Three-and-a-Quar-
ter per Cent. Reduced, 102% 103. City of Dublin Steam Shares,
52%; Dublin and Glasgow Steam Company, 44 ; Mining
Company of Ireland, 14 ; Dublin and Drogheda Railway, 821/2 ;
Great Southern and Western, 111/ ; Ditto Extension to
Cork and Limerick, 7 ; Irish Great Western. Dublin to Gal-
way, 2% ; Wexford and Carlow Junction, 2%; Dundalk and
Enniskillen, 2% 3/4 ; Waterford and Limerick, 4% %; Bel-
fast and Ballymena, 3% 4; Cork and Bandon, 934.

be given to them which would check them from put-
ting the law in practice in a manner which must
produce so much dissatisfaction, because of its great
injustice amongst those who were to pay it.—Hear.)
General JOHNSON said it was necessary that
some alteration -should be made in the law, because
it was se oppressive that people in trade did not
know what they were about. If persons did not know
what they were worth, and if they offered to produce
their books in case what they said was disputed, and
a sum was still levied upon them at the will of the
Commissioners, those persons must give up
their entire property to the will of the Commissioners.
This was a most unjust and iniquitous proceeding
towards his colleague, who was in a large way of
business, and who was surcharged to an amount of
24,000 L, when he had actually lost that sum.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
he had never heard of the circumstances to which the
Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Finsbury, had ad-
verted till that moment when he had heard the state-
ment. He did not know how that case arose,
and knowing nothing of the circumstances it was out
of his power to satisfy the House with respect to it.
But he knew this, that if Mr. Fielden had

lected it, that there was a power of bringing the case
before the Commissioners of Somerset House,
through an appeal, of which he might have
availed himself; to correct the error of the
Commissioners in the country, if they made
any error at all. The case was, therefore, not
without a remedy—(Hear, hear)—and he begged
leave to point out that as the best remedy to which
Mr. Fielden could have recourse to rectify the error
of which he complained. There was an independent
authority in Commissioners in London to inquire into
the circumstances, and to apply a remedy.
Mr. WAKLEY, in explanation, said that Mr.
Fielden stated that he had appealed against this 24,0001.
surcharge. He made no general accusation against the
commissioners, as he knew, in the metropolis,
that they behaved with great forbearance, and between
70 and 80 per cent. of the appeals were allowed.
Mr. BRIGHT wished to call the atttention of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to a circumstance which
created great dissatisfaction in his district. The Com-
missioners were chosen from the Commissioners of
Land-tax, who were all of one political party,
and there was a general impression that they
did not deal impartial justice. It was be-
lieved that it was of no use for persons of the
opposite party to appeal to them ; and he knew a
gentleman, of undoubted veracity, who preferred to
put up with a surcharge, because he had found that
his statements would not be listened to.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that the Gentleman last mentioned by the Hon. Mem-
ber for Durham might have apperled at once to the
Commissioners at Somerset-house if he did
not _ ehooseto apply to the local Commissioners

—Mr. HAWES said it was important to be gene-
rally known, that the Act gave the power of appeal
to the Commissioners at Somerset House, in the first
instonce.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER re-
ferred the Hon. Gentleman to the 131st clause of the
Act.

Mr. BERNAL said the Honourable Member for
Finsbury had not complained of the absence of
appeal from the local Commissioners ; but the cane
of the Hon. Member for Oldham was, that these
Commissioners postponed a case till after Easter, but
in the meantime sent another demand for the tax.

LTMINGTON, MARCH 10.—Part of a wreck was passed on
the 7th inst., in eight fathoms, the Dudgeon bearing N.N.E.,
distant about three miles, by the Revenge, arrived
.here.
SHOREHAM, MAncti 10. The Fortitude, Vasey, from
Shields, in coming in struck the middle pier, and damaged
her stern.