The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-04 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 3.

The SPEAKIIR took the Chair shortly before Four
o'clock.
The Bridgewater Navigation and Railways Bill was
read a second time, and ordered to be committed.
The Chester and Holyhead Railway Bill was read a
second time, and ordered to 1):! committed.
The Thames Navigation Debt Bill was read a second
time, and ordered to be committed.
On the motion of Mr. BROTHERTON, the Man-
chester South Junction and Altrincham Railway Bill
was read a second time, and ordered to be committed.
On the motion of Mr. H. JOHNSTONE, the Cale-
donian Railway Bill was read a second time, and ordered
to be committed.

Lord EBRINGTON presented a petition in favour of
the Plymouth and Stonehouse Gas Bill. On the motion
of the Noble Lord the Bill was read a second time, and
ord red to be committed.

On the motion of Sir J. Y. BULLER, the Devonport
Gas Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
co:nmitted.

On the motion of Mr. CIIRISTOPIIER, the Great
Grimsby and Sheffield Junction Railway Bill was read a
second time, and ordered to be committed.

Mr. 11. lIINDE brought in the Newcastle and Dar-
lington Branch Railway Bill, which VMS read a first and
ordered to be read a second time.

LONDON AND YORK RAILWAY.

Mr. ASTELL moved the second reading of the Len-
don and York Railway Bill.
Mr. M. MILNES would not, as it was understood
that the second reading should take place pro forma,
and the discussion be taken in the Commit-
tee, offer any opposition at the present moment.
He might as well, however, take that opportunity of
mentioning that there were rumours abroad of an agree-
ment having been made between this and a competing
line, calculated to injure the interests of private pro-
perty. The arrangement, as he understood, con-
sisted of these terms :—" You shall give up a
certain number of objections which you have made '
to our line, and we will give up a similar number of oh-
jections which we have made to yours." Now there
could be no doubt such an arrangement as this was in-
jurious to private property, particularly as these under-
takings have the advantage of possessing great
influence and immense capital. It behoved Par-
liament, therefare, to see that these abuses
were act tolerated, and it would be as well that
some step should be taken to give parties whose rights
would be injured by such an agreement, notice
that they had full power to bring all their claims before
the Committee on Standing Orders. If such a
course as this were adopted it would effectually
prevent the rights of private property being injured in
other instances by similar undertakings.
Sir J. YARDE BULLER knew nothing of the merits
of the Bill, but as chairman of the Committee on Standing
Orders, to which the petition on the Bill was referred,
he could state that the standing orders had been strictly
complied with.—(llear.) Whether such an arrange•
ment as that meaaioned by the Hon. Member had been
come to out of doors was not for him to say—all that he
could state was, that no petition whatever alleging
any non-compliance of the standing -c,rders was
brought before the Committee.—(Hear, hear.) With
any such arrangement, of course, they had nothing to
do; but as far as ordinary care was concerned, he could
state, that the Committee used their exertions to arrive
at a proper conclusion. The line passed through from
200 to 300 parishes, and the general impression left upon
the minds of 09 committee was, that the vase for

the Bill had been got up with A commendable degree of
care.—(Hear, hear.)
The Bill wai then read a st mad time.
GREAT GRIMSBY AND SHEFFIELD JUNO-

that it was not proper to disclose the progress of the nego-
tiation. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman must feel that
our relations were not with the House of Representatives.
While he quite agreed wiTh the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman as to the impropriety of using . such language, he
trusted the Hon. and Learned Gentleman and the House
would not infer that her Majesty's Government were not
deeply sensible of the importance of the question.
DIVETT asked the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R.
Peel) if, in connexion with this subject he had seen a
remarkasle c xpression contained in the work of M. de
Moprat, now publishincr in Paris, on California, in which
he states that he had examined the Oregon question,
and states his conviction of the perfect justice of the
English claim. The French writer said:—" II Taut
avouer que cette fois la raison et le droit, sont de leur
cote."

Sir R. PEEL was understood to say that he had not
seen the work allug!ed to, and that the lion. Member
should hare given him notice of his question. •
Mr. 13LE WITT saki it was rather singular the in-
formation should have come from the United States, in-
stead of through their own Government.
Sir R. PEEL thought her Majesty's Government
were quite justified in withholding the correspondence.
WAYS AND MEANS.
On the motion for reading the order of the day for
going into Committee of Ways and Means,
S'r W. CLAY having presented a petition from a
number of sugar refiners, relating to the change in the
sugar duties, saint, the amendment, of which he had
given notice, would be most appropriately moved on the
third resolution, and he trusted the Chancellor of the
Exchequer would not press them through so rapidly as
not to afford proper time for the discussion of his amend-
ment.

The crder of the day was then read, the Speaker left
the Chair, and the House resolved itself into a Com-
mittee of Ways and Means.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said,
that in addition to the notice be had on the paper with
respect to the sugar duties, there was another to which
he wished shortly to call the attention of the Muse;
it was with respect to the Consolidated Fund Bill.
In consequence of Easter falling at so early a period
of the year there would not be the necessary
funds, and as the resolution was an ordinary vote, and
one to which there was no objection, he hoped, as that
resolution was the foundation of a Bill, the House 'would
allow it to pass without any opposition.
WIND )W-TAX.

On the question that the resolution that 8,000,0001. be
granted to her Majesty,
Mr. HUNIE rose. He wished to know whether the
Right lion. Baronet, upon the Committee moved for by
the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath being appointed
to ingaire into the window duties, he would have any ob-
jection to allow that Committee to take into its consi-
deration the propriety of substituting a house-tax forit?
He had looked lately seriously into the question, and he
felt no doubt that the most serious consequences arose
from the window• tax.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said that the question
was one of great importance, and one that he
could not satisfactorily discuss in answer to a
question. It must be remembered that there were
in existence at the same time a house and a window
duty. The House had at that time the option of taking
off the window or the house duty ; it preferred taking
off the house duty. He did not think it would be wise
to discuss the question further now.
Mr. HUME said it should be recollected that when
half the window-tax was taken off, it was promised the
other half should be taken off also at a future period.
He, therefore, thought that was no ground for the
Right lion. Gentleman declining to answer the question.
Captain PECHELL wished to know if the Hon. Gen-
tleman had any objection to lay before the House the
number of appeals which had been made against the
window duty

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
such a return would be attended with so much difficulty
and trouble, that it would be almost impossible to make it.
Mr. HUME expressed his surprise that no return
was kept at the tax-office of the number of appeals.
Were there no records kept of these matters ? If
not, there was something wrong in the management.
He would respectfully submit that if those documents to
which he alluded could not be had, there was something
seriously wrong in that department. He conceived that
a correct record ought to be kept, for he was aware that
a great deal of vexation and trouble attended this mode
of taxation, and therefore, on that ground, he was the
more surprised that no record of the discipline he men-
tioned had been kept.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
appeared to him that the Honourable Member was
not aware of the state of the law in this respect. Until
a very late period the parochial authorities were not
obliged by law to keep any such records; and, there-
fore, not having kept them, it would be impossible to
supply them now satisfactorily.
Mr. BERNAL said, as the House was on the sub-
ject, he would beg ta call the attention of the Right Hon.
Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government to the
subject of the general mode of collecting the taxes.
—(Hear, hear.) There was a crying evil in
the shape of what were called "surcharges.' This was
a great cause of complaint • but those who were the
victims of it were often compelled to bear with it, and
submit to the sacrifice, as their business would not
rermit their attendance and loss of time required by an
appeal. Then, with regard to the collectors of the
assessed taxes, he knew several of them who, though
they paid but sixty or seventy pounds a-year as a per
centage, paid as much to a deputy, which the
collector explained by saying he undertook the
office with a view to procuring a few addi-
tional customers. This was his reason fore asking,.
why should any man undertake the responsible duty-of
a tax-collector unless there was some it ducement to
him much stronger than the remuneration he received?
and hence the abuses of the present system,
which he conceived ought to be inquired into.
He thought the whole system was bad, and ought to be
revised.

Mr. ROEBUCK thought the present system of collec-
tion was bad. In one case which respected himself, when
he asked where he should pay in the tax, he was told that
the collector attended in his office only once a week, and
when he inquired why that wis so, he was told by the
collector that he was only paid by a small per tentage,
and could not afford to devote any more time.
Mr. HUME thought that no collector ought to be al.
lowed to appoint a deputy. He knew in his own parish
that when the collector sent in the amount of the tax,
he wrote on the other side that he had tea, or salt, or
candles, or something else to sell, and in this way be
thought he could get customers. He thought this ought
not to be allowed. He thought that the appointment
should he made by the Government, and that there should
be no intermediate appointment by the Commissioners.
he hoped that some Hon. Member would make a motion
on the subject.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS was surprised to hear his Hon.
Friend complain that these taxes were collected too
cheaply. If the Government could get proper security
for the safety of the money, he thought they were per-
fectly right in getting the collection made as cheaply as
possible. He did not see how the Chancellor of the
Exchequer could prevent persons from endeavouring to
promote their own business while engaged in the col-
iced, n of the taxes, and he was moreover of opinion that
he had no right to do so.
Mr. lIUSIE had not objected to the cheapness but to
the mode of the collection. What he complained of
was that those persons who did not deal with the tax-
gatherer were liable to be surcharged.