The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-13 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, MARCI-1 13, 1845.

, on their return from service and their appointment to
the Arctic Expedition ; Commanders, Henry Chads
and E. Codd, on their promotion and return from
foreign service ; C.unmarider Sir W. Ifo,te, Omani
W. H. Hull, G. Maubray, Lieutenants J. Willouihby,
and S 0. Woodbridge, by Lord Haddiagton.
Captains, I. Penny, R. 11. Wardell, Arniel ; Lieutenants,
C. M'Culluin, William Southey, and Mr. J. Palsgrave,
en their return from India ; Lieutenant-Colonel
Newell; Major A. Hyslop; Lieutenants, E. Eaatwick.
H. Hu:hall, W. J. Pogson, W. Rtnnington, I. 11.
Heathorn, C. N. Halked,Dr. Ryan, and Mr. 11. Irwin,
by Lord Ripon.
Commander James Stoddart, on promotion, and return
from China ; and Lieutenant W. B. Parker, on his
appointment, by Sir W. Parker.
Major Lawrensor ; Lieutenant J. W. Hughes, on ha
promotion, by the Hon. E. Lygon.
Li utenant-Colonel Daly, on promotion and return
from India ; and Captain Low, on promotion, by Sir
C. Dalbrac.
Major, the lion. H. Crichton ; Lieutenants, H. Stone,
and J. Grove, by Colonel Moore.
Colonels, Sir F. Cockburn, on return from Bahamas,
and Sir R. Doherty, on return from the West Indies,
by Lord Stanley.
Lieutenants I. W. Stewart, and J. N. Peto, on their re-
turn from the West Indies, by General M'Leod.
Lieutenant-General Maister, on return from the West
Indies, and appointment ; Colonels, Thorne, on ap-
pointment, and Clive, on promotion, by the Duke
of Wellington.
Captains Unett and Macartney and Lieut. Todd, on their
return from India; Capt. Poore and Cornet Keene, on
their appointments, by Cul. Middleton.
Lieutenants Stace, Du Cane, Clarke, and Tilly, by the
Inspector of Fortifictitions.
Cornets Dodnell, D. Lane, H. Lindow, and Anderton, on
their appointments ; Lieutenant Miles and Mr. An-
derson, by Colonel St. Quintin.
Captain Holder, on promotion; Major Longfield, En-
signs Charter, A. J. Garnett, Baynes, and Stone, by
Sir H. Bayley.
Captains F. P. Nott and Wm. Wood, Staff Officers of
Pensioners, by Lieut.-Colonel Tulloch.
Captain E. F. Grant and Lieutenant R. E. F. Craufurd,
on their appointments; Captain 11. Turner, on promo-
tion; Colonel Power, on return from Ceylon; Lieute-
nants F. Ord, W. J. Hughes. J. Thring, C. Wright, G.
Barstow, J. Buothby, and Mr. C. Young, by Sir G.
Murray.
Ensigns Winscom, Maberly, Hyde, Fife, Grindall,
Walker, Boddam, Greathed, Bean, Young, Jones,
G over, and Hutchinson, by Sir F. Smith.
Lieutenant Edward Little, by Captain Toup Nicolas.
Lieutenant E. B. Rice, R.N., by E. Rice, Eq., M.P.
Ensign William E. F. O'Brien, on appointment to the
54th Regiment, by his father, Captain Donat H.
O'Brien, R.N.
Cornet Power, en return from India, by his father,
Colonel Power, R.A.
Ensign R. Doran, on appointment to the 18th Royal
Irith, by Colonel D. Pitt, K.H.
Ensign Hugh Montgomery Archdall, by his brother,
Captain Mervyn Archdall, M.P.
Captain F. N. Skinner, on return from foreign service,
by Admiral Lord Colville.
Captain Bischoff, by Earl De Grey.
Assistant-Surgeon Tardrew, on appointment, by Lord
De Ros.
Commander James Fitzjames, on return from service in
China and appointment to the Arctic expedition, by
Sir John Barrow, Bart.
Captain Long, by Earl Bruce.
Captain George Lewis, by Colonel C. Wyndham, M.P.
Commander 11. J. Douglas, R.N., on promotion, by
Lieutenant-General Sir Howard Douglas.
Lieutenant-Dillon, by Lieutenant-General Sir Henry F.
Bouverie.

iieutenant and Adjutant C. Glazbrook, by Lieutenant-

Colonel Adams, C.B.
Lieutenant Charles Townshe-ad Wilson, by his Grace
the Duke of Buccleuch, 1.G.. .

Mr. Hume presented to her Majesty a petition under
the seal and sign manual of his Highness Pertaub
Shean, the deposed Raja of Sattara, and the legal
descendant of the great Seerajce, the founder of the
Mahratta empire. The Raja prays her Majesty to he
graciously pleased to extend to him that protection
which he has a right to expect from the honour and
justice of the British Government, viz., that he may be
furnished with a copy of the charges and the evidence
against him which he has demanded, and which have
hitherto been refused him, and by which he has, without
a trial, or ma a hearing, which the meanest of her Ma-
jesty's subjects has the right to demand, bt en deposed
from his throne, and now remains an exile and a pri-
soner at Benares.

The Earl of Devon presented a petition from the
Dean and Chapter of Exeter, against the union of the
sees of St. Asaph and Bangor.
After the Levee, the Marquis of Westminster had an
audience of the Queen, to return the Riband and Badge
of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, worn by the late
Marquis of Westminster.
The Right Hon. Sir George Grey, Bart., had an au-
dience of her Majesty to return the Riband and Badge
of the Most Honourable Military Order of the Bath,
worn by the late General the Hon. Sir Henry G. Grey,
G.C.B.

The Queen held a Chapter of the Most Ancient and
Most Noble Order of the Thistle. The Knights Brethren
were habited in the mantles of green velvet by Mr. Hun-
ter and Mr. Ede, in the Portrait Gallery, and also wore
their collars. The Knights Brethren present were the
Earl of Aberdeen, the Earl of Rosebery, and the Earl
of Mansfield.

The Officers of the Order appeared in their mantles,
and wore their chains and badges. Those present were
Albert William Woods, Esq. (Lancaster Herald), De-
puty to Sir John Richardson, Bart., Secretary to the
Order ; and Frederick Pea Round, Esq., Gentleman
Usher of the Green Rod.

Soon after three o'clock, the Knights Brethren having
been called over by the Deputy-secretary, proceeded to
the presence of the Sovereign in the Chapter Room,
attended by the officers of the Order.
The Queen was seated in the Chair of State, and wore
the mantle and collar of the Order ; his Royal Highness
Prince Albert also wore the mantle and collar. Her
Majesty was pleased to command the Knights Brethren
to take their seats at the table, according to their seniority
in the Order, the officers standing in their places at the
bottom of the table.

The Sovereign was then pleased to signify her royal
pleasure touch ng the election of a Knight into the
Order, the Knights Brethren proceeded to the election ;
and the suffrages having been collected by the Deputy-
secretary (commencing with the Junior Knight), were
by him, kneeling, presented to the Queen, who was pleased
to declare that James Duke of Montrose had been duly
elected a Knight of the Most Ancient and Most Noble
Order of the Thistle.

Then by command of the Sovereign the Duke of
Montrose was received at the door of the Chapter Room
by the Earl of Mansfield, the Junior Knight present,
and was conducted to the Queen, preceded by the De-
puty Secretary, bearing on a velvet cushion the ensigns
of the Order, and by the Usher of the Green Rod.
The Sword of State, borne by Sir William Martins,
Gentleman Usher, having been handed to the Queen by
the Lord Chamberlain, her Majesty was graciously
pleased to confer the honour of Knightl:ood upon the
Duke of Montrose. His Grace rising had the honour to
kiss the Sovereign's hand.
The Duke of Montrose again kneeling near the Sove-
reign, and the Deputy Secretary on his knee presenting
to her Majesty the Riband and Jewel of the Order, her
Majesty was graciously pleased to place the same over
the Noble Duke's left shoulder. His Grace having kissed
the Sovereign's hand, and received the congratulations of
the Knights Brethren, retired.
-The Chapter being ended the Knights Brethren were
by command of the Queen again called over by the De-
puty Secretary, and, with the officers of the Order, re-
tired from the presence of her Majesty with the usual
revs rences.

The ceremony took place in the Throne•rocm, in the
presence of the Ministers and Officers of State.
After the investiture, her Majesty and Prince Albert,
attended by the royal suite, returned to Buckingham
Palace, escorted by a party of Life Guards.

Her Majesty had a dinner, party yesterday, at Buck-
ingham Palace. The company invited included their
Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge,
his Excellency Aali Effendi, his Excellency the Russian
Minister and the Baroness de Brunnow, the Duke of
Buckingham and Chandos, the Marquis of Northampton,
the Marquis of Granby, the Earl of Liverpool, the Earl
and Countess de Grey, Lord and Lady Colborne, and
the Equerry in Waiting to the Duke of Cambridge.
A deputation from Liverpool, respecting the restric-
tions by the Board of Customs on the trade of the port,
consisting of Lord Sandon, M.P., Sir Howard Douglas,
M.P., Mr. T. B. Horsfall, Mr. David Hodgson, Mr.
James Aiken, and Mr. Brantley Moore, had an inter-
view with Sir Robert Peel yesterday, at his official resi-
dence in Downing-street.
Lord William Lennox visited Captain Siborne's new
Waterloo model yesterday, his Lordship was the fourth
member of his family on this glorious field, accompany-
ing the late Duke of Richmond who was present, al-
though not a military man.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 12.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
Mr. ALLIX moved that the Members for the
borough of Aylesbury he added to the Committee on
the Sparrows Herne Road Bill.
Mr. GREENE hoped that the House would not
consent to this motion, as it would be establishing a
Yery bad precedent.
Sir. ALLIX considered that as the road was to
terminate in the town of Aylesbury, it was but fair
that the opinions of the inhabitants should, through
the medium of their representatives, be consulted in
the matter.

The motbn was agreed to.
MIDLAND RAILWAY EXTENSION.

Sir W. IIEATIICOTE brought up the report on
this Bill. The standing orders had been complied
v. ith.

KENDAL. RESERVOIR.

Sfr J. Y. BULLER brought up the report on this
Bill. The standing orders had been complied with.

STANDING ORDERS ON RAILWAYS.

It was reported that in the London, Bedford, and
Birmingham Railway the standing orders had been
complied with; as also with respect to the Trent
Valley Railway, and the Norwich and Yarmouth
Railway.
SHEFFIELD AND LINCOLNSIIIRE
RAILWAY.

On the motion of Mr. JOHN PARKER, this Bi
was brought up and read a first time.
GLOSSOP RAILWAY BILL.

On the motion of Mr. J. PARKER this Bill was
brought up and read a first time.
NEWPORT AND PONTYPOOL RAILWAY.
Mr. DARBY brought up the Bill for this rail-
way, and it was read a first time.
LONDON ORPHAN ASYLUM.

On the motion of Mr. TROTTER, this Bill was
read the first time.
NEWARK AND SHEFFIELD RAILWAY.
Colonel ROLLESTON brought up the Bill for
this railway, and it was read the first time.
INCREASE OF THE NAVY.
Mr. J. PARKER presented a petition from the
Sheffield Peace Society against any increase in the
navy, and suggesting that it would be much better to
settle national disputes by arbitration than arms.

WINDOW-TAX.
Sir G. GREY presented a petition from Devonport
for the abolition of the window-tax.
Lord ASHLEY presented several petitions against
the sale of intoxicating liquors on the Sabbath.
Mr. F. MACKENZIE presented a petition from
the schoolmasters of Peebles, praying the House to
take measures to alleviate their distressed condition.
Mr. C. BERKELEY presented a petition from a
solLitor residing at Cheltenham, against certain
clauses in the Bastardy Bill.
Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition from a sur-
geon residing in Great Russell-street, against the
income. tax.

Mr. CRIPPS presented a petition from the As-
sociated Justices' Clerks against that clause in the
Clerks at Petty Sessions Bill, which prohibits them
from conducting prosecutions.
NOTICE OF MOTION.

Dr. BOWRING gave notice that, in Committee on
the Bastardy Bill, he would move that the justices of
the peace should have power to issue an order of affi-
liation in cases where the mother of the child died
before the order was applied for.
RAILWAYS.

Mr. G. BANKES presented a petition from the
inhabitants of Chard, in the county of Somerset, com-
plaining that the decision of the Board of Trade,
in respect to certain railways, was inconsistent with
the interest of the petitioners.
The Hort. DIEM BEE also presented a petition from
another place in Somersetshire, complaining that the
Board of Trade had given preference to two lines of
railway which were not so advantageous to the inte-
rests of the petitioners as others that might be adopted.
PROPERTY-TAX—BENEVOLENT
SOCIETIES.

On the motion that the order of the day be read,
Mr. E. ELLICE, jun., said he wished to call the
attention of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer to a class of cases which ap-
parently ought not to come under the operation of
the income-tax—he meant provident societies, whose
income was under 1501. He knew of a society which
had been established upwards of a century for
granting pensions to widows and orphans.
That society had been charged with the tax,
although- the income of the society was under 1501.,
which was derived from investments in land and
loans. The managers of the society appealed to the
Assistant-Commissioners, but they dismissed the ap-
peal on the ground that the property was not vested
in Government securities. He (Mr. Ellice) had
looked into the Act, and there, certainly, he found a
clause to the effect, that if the property was not so in-
vested it should not be exempt from the tax. In
other cases the parties might have the drawback ;
but in this case that could not be done, because the
payments of the society were made in sums of from
ss. to Si. He now asked the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer whether it was contemplated by the Govern-
ment to exempt societies established for purely bene-
volent purposes ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that the clause to which the Hon. Gentleman referred
was inserted for the purpose of exempting benevolent
societies which were enrolled according to the Act of
Parliament. But in cases where the societies were
only voluntary, and their prcperty was invested
in mortgages and such securities, it was
very difficult to provide an exemption. He
had only received the Hon. Gentleman's notice
about an hour before he came down to the House, and
he immediately communicated with the department to
which the notice referred, and he would take care
that measures should be taken for affording relief, and
it was only in consequence of the construction of the
law that a remedy had not been already given.
Mr. ELLICE said the reason he had not com-
municated with the Right Hon. Gentleman before
was that he had only received the case within the
last few days.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE wished to call the atten-
tion of the Right Honourable Gentleman to
another case. It was known that the legacy-
duty department and the assessment to the
income and property-tax were carried on under
the same Commissioners, viz., the Stamps and Taxes'
Commissioners. Now, suppo,ing a person left another
an annuity of 1,0001. a year, and the person to whom
the annuity was left was sixty-four years of age,
according to the tables of the officers of the legacy
department, that annuity, so granted, was worth 8,3001.
The charge on that individual, not being a relation by
blood, would be of course 10 per cent., amounting to '
8301. To pay that he was allowed four years, thereby
reducing his income in round numbers to 8001. a year.
Now any one would suppose when the assessment to
the property and income-tax was made, that he would
only have to pay 8001. a year ; such, however,
was not the case, for he was assessed at one
thousand pounds a year. Now that appeared to
him to be a palpable injustice, and he trusted the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer would give instructions to have that injustice re-
medied. He wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentle-
man another question. Ile understood that since the
property-tax had been established, there had been at
the office of the Commissioners of Stamps and Taxes,
for the purpose of making assessments to the
income-tax, a copy of the Bank of England Dividend
Book. Now, it had always been supposed that was a
secret record kept by the Bank of England only.
[The Hon. Member was proceeding when he was
called to order by the Speaker.] He wished to know
whether the documents to which he had alluded were
actually sent to the Stamp-office ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
;hat the documents were not sent to the Stamp •office.

evening, and that the discussion should he postponed
till this day week. He trusted that no opposition
would be offered to this mode of proceeding, as all
would have an opportunity of expressing their
opinions when the discussion was taken. He then
moved that the Bill be read a second time.
Mr. HAWES said he would not offer any oppo-
sition to the Bill until he had heard the opinion of
the Noble Lord at the head of the Woods and
Forests; but he thought it would be better to post-
pone the second readinc, for the present.
Lord LINCOLN thought it nould be much more
for the convenience of the House if the Honourable
Member would consent to postpone the second read-
ing until after the holidays.—(Hear, hear.) He had
already promised that he would examine into the sub-
ject' and consult scientific men as to the best course
to be adopted. Within the last two days he had re-
ceived some information on the subject. One reason why
he was anxious to have the Bill postponed for a short
time was that measures of a sanatory character,
of much greater importance, and on a far larger scale,
were under the consideration of the Government;
and he thought the decision of the House, in refer-
ence to the present Bill, would be materially influ-
enced by those measures.—(Hear, hear.) He would
therefore advise the Hon. Gentleman to postpone the
Bill until about a fortnight after Easter.
Mr. MUNTZ hoped the Hon. Gentleman would
_ _

take the advice of the Noble Lord, and in the mean-
time consider how far it would be possible for him to
alter the Bill as to the appointment of inspectors ; if
he did not, he should feel it his duty to resist the
measure. He could not approve of appointing in-
spectors to discover the nuisance. Only imagine a
nuisance so small as to require inspectors to find it
out.—(Laughter.) Ile would go further than this.
Suppose these inspectors were in league with those
who had plans of preventing the nuisance, they might
be continually tormenting the manufacturers to adopt
these schemes.

Mr. WAKLEY said the Noble Lord himself did not
state what course he was prepared to pursue with respect
to the Bill if it should be postponed. With respect
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 he appointed on the present Bill. As to the report
of the Committee ittelf, he had a perfect knowledge
of its contents.

Sir W. CI, 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 pubic 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. I 3 RIGHT 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 t o postpone this
measure until the result of the experiment about to
be male in Manchester had been ascertained. The
people of Manchester were favourable to putting down
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 2,1 of April.
PRO PE ftT Y-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/. We exhibited a return
to them, which showed that, in the average 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 Com-
missioners residing in the country, who acted in this
outrageously unjust manner, would receive some
intimation from head- quarters which would cl eck 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 theze were any
parties who had! any general control over those
Commissioners, he trusted that some intimation would
be given to them which woul 1 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.—(llear.)
General JOHNSON sad it was necessary that
some alte:ati( n should be made in the law, because

it was so oppressive that pePple in trade did not
know what they Its about. If persons did not know
w'sat tiv.,y were worth, and if they offered to produce

their boas case what they sail was di puied, and
a sum WtS still levied upon them at the will of the
Commissioners, those persons must give up
their. e itire 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
24,0001, when he had actually lost that sum.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
he hail never heard of the circumstances to which the
Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Finsbury, hail ad-
verted till that moment when he had heard the state-

rcont. 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.
Bat he knew this, that if Mr. Fie!den had recol-
lected it, 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
Commissioners in the country, if they m

any error at all. The case was, therefore, not
without a remedy—(flear, 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, explanation, said that Mr.
Fit den stated that he had appealed against this 24,000/.
surcharge. Ile made no general accusation against the
commissioners, as ho knew, in the metropolis,
that they behaved with great forbearance, and lyitween
70 and 80 per cent. of the appeals were allowed.
Mr. BRIGHT wished to call the attention 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 ha 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 appealed at once to the
Commissioners at Somerset llouse if he did not
choo3e to 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
instance.
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 case
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.

Sir R. PEEL said that the Lords of the Tremury
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
oltjection, 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). aright 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 an 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 no 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 conscious
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 surcharged 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 would
be offered 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 busi-
ness—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
maintenance of the parties, their families, or
establishments ; Be it Enacted, that from and
after the passing of this Act, whenever 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 fur such
employment if any other person had been so employed."
Now the 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 his own
family, he was not entitled to deduct from
his profits the value of the labour of 0-wee
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
maintenance 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.
This operated most unjustly, for where a person em-
ployed members of his own family in conducting hi 3
business, he was not permitted to make any
deduction on account of their services,
whereas his neighbour employed in a similar
business, but who had no children, was entitled to
make a deduction from his profits for all persons em-
ployed by him, and to whom he paid wages. It was
a great injustice that a man should be thus placed in
a better situation than his rival. They ought to con-
sider, not who did the labour, but what was the value
of the labour which was done. He proposed to give
the Commissioners power to allow persons so situated
to make such deductions as might be just and reason-
able. The present system created a great injury to
individuals, and a great objection in the public mind ,
against the inequality of the tax. He was aware that
objections might be made to his proposal—he would
be met by the common-place objection that a door
would be open to fraud, but he would answer that by
another common-place question, and ask what was
the use of their expensive machinery, if they ware not
enabled to do justice and prevent fraud ? Things were
not come to such a pass that the House of Commons
was obliged to commit injustice because there was
danger of fraud. What was the chance of fraud ?
On the one part they would have the appellant anxi-
ous to escape from the assessment—but speaking from
experience, he must say that there were very few
attempts made by tradesmen to escape from their
fair share of the tax—but on the other hand they had
the Government officers who had every means
in their power of making proper inquiries.
Then another check was that of the Commissioners.
They had local knowledge. Having local knowledge
they could come to the consideration of this subject
with full power to check all fraud. He thought that
if they took all these things into consideration, the
House would see that there was no danger of fraud
arising out of the clause which he had proposed. The
intention of the Act was that the tax should
be imposed in two different shapes. One was a tax
on profits arising from the use of capital, and
tl e other upon profits, the produce of the la-
bour of individuals. In order to tax labour the
individual must receive 1501. This tax was
now frequently imposed upon the labour of several
individuals, and if their labour were to be separated
it would be found that not one of them was subject
to the tax. One objection to the remedy which he
prop( sed was that it would open a door to innumer-
able able applications, to which proper attention coi
not be given. He thought there was nothing
in this objection. The House ought to be just.
If more time were required to consider this subject
Parliament ought to have been called together earlier.
He would pray of the house, then, to give this subject
that due and deliberate consideration which he con-
ceived it was entith d to receive at their hands, and
which the merits of it called for. The Chancellor of
the Exchequer need have no fear that any real or sub-
stantial inconvenience or ii jury would result by
the adoption of this proposition ; but all should
admit that the principle was erroneous which
went to the extent of Lsserting, that because a
man was in the receipt of 1501. a year, he
should therefore he compelled to pay this tax. In
conclusion, he would only say he hoped the House
%vould give him credit for not having brought forward
this subject without good and sufficient grounds for
FO doing.—(Hear, hear.) Ile knew he had been sent
here by a large and respectable constituency;
and it was his duty to defend their interests to
the b .st of his judgment and ability, and
that he had not shown any feeling but that which he
had stated actuated him in bringing it forward.
Mr. MUNTZ begged to assure the Right Hon.
Baronet opposite that this would be of the greatest
importance tO Email manufacturers, such its his con-

stituents, whose profits were so low that the continu-
ation of this tax would leave them no profits at all.
On the question being put that the clause be
agreed to,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said he gave the Honourable Member full credit
for the motive which had induced him to
bring this subject under consideration; 2nd if he did
not agree to it, it would not be because there was not
time to do justice to all parties who had claims
upon the Legislature. Ile agreed with the Hon.
Member also in thinking that they shoul.l lay the
burdens of the State on those who were able to bear
them. But he must resist this motion, because he
believed that, as the law stood, every relief was afforded
except such as would operate unjustly to other classes.
The maintenance of a family was supposed to be a
proper employment of income, and the income of
every man was taxed on the supposition that he de-
frayed out of it the expenses of his family. If
any person employed in trade employed a mem-
ber of his family, whom he paid for his services,
he would be entitled to claim exemption in that
respect. The Hon. Member said that nothing would
be easier than to carry out his proposal by the em-
ployment of public officers. Why, for a public officer
to interfere with the domestic arrangements of a
family would be a very serious and objectionable thing.
He would call the attention of the House to another
clause which the Hon. Member had given notice of
bringing before them. He alluded to that
in which the Hon. Member wished to
deduct from the tax, the amount of local and other
rates. He had no hesitation, whatever, in
saying, that local rates levied on that part of the
premises which was employed in trade, were
allowed to be deducted by the provisions of the Act
itself; therefore, if the allowance had not been made in
some particular cases, it was owing to the maladminis-
tration of the law, and not to the law itself. With respect
to the other point urged by his Hon. Friend, he did
not think it would be just, or that it would contribute
in any way towards the easy collection of the tax,
that they should depart from the original principle.
Mr. SPOONED wished to explain. The Right
Hon. Gentleman had, he felt sure, unin`entionally
misrepresented him. He did not say that the tax-
gatherer ought to enter every man's house to ascer-
tain how his family. was employed, nor did what he
said imply it. With respect to the second clause,
after the Right Ilon. Gentleman's declaration, he
would not take up the time of the House in alluding
to it ; but this he would say, that the Right Hon.
Gentleman was mistaken in saying the maladminis-
tration of the law, in respect to the allowance of local
rates, was only particular and partial ; it was general
if not universal, and several cases of the kind had

come under his own immediate knowledge. Ile had
inquired in two or three different offices, one of them
in the City, and he found it was the universal prac-
tice to allow rent, because rent was mentioned, and
to disallow poor rates and local rates, because the
mentioning of rent and not of rates did, by inference,
exclude them.

The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the clatue . ... 39
Against it
Majority against the clause —ll2
The clause vv: ~s consequently lost.
Mr. SPOONER then moved—" And be it further
enacted that from and after the passing of this Act it
shall be lawful for all persons chargeable under
schedules 1) and E, who may have effected, or may
hereafter effect any insurance or insurances on their
respective life or lives, to claim deduction for the
amount of the annual premium paid for such insu-
rance or insurances ; and whenever such deduction so
claimed shall reduce the net annual income below
the annual sum of 150/., the parties so claiming
shall be entitled to exemption from payment of duty."
His object in moving this resolution was, to allow
persons who insured their lives for the benefit of their
families, to deduct the premiums which they paid for
these insurances from the amount of their profits. It
was their duty to enable persons who had to depend
upon small salaries and incomes to make this provi-
sion for their families after death. The Right Hon.
Baronet, the other evening, said he excluded clergy-
men from the operation of this Act, but this was not
the case. The Right Hon. Baronet only excluded
those clergymen whose incomes or livings depended
upon tithes.—(Hear, hear.) It might be objected
that an insurance did not differ in the least degree
from any other investment, from which an immediate
interest was derived. He, however, did not admit
the justness of this reasoning, for, to a certain ex-
tent, paying premiums on an insurance was an
absolute loss ; while, on the other hand, in-
vestment in the shape of annuities, &c.,
brought in immediate returns. Again, it might
be objected that a man, to evade the income or
property-tax, would invest all his profits in in-
surances. But the unprofitable nature of investment
—for to a certain extent it was unprofitable—would
effectually prevent tradesmen or professional men re-
sorting to this system of fraud.—(Hear, hear.) All
he asked for was, that, from the incomes of profes-
sional gentlemen, clergymen, and annuitants, there
might be deducted the atrount of insurance which
they paid upon their lives. They had already paid a
tax on the policy, which increased their claim. lie
would not trouble the house at further length, and
thanked them for the patience with which they had
heard him.

Lord J. MANNERS seconded the motion, Le-
cause he approved of the tax itself, and because he was
anxious to render it as equitable as possible. He con-
sidered that the class mentioned by the Hon. Member
was every way entitled to the benefits of such a
provision.
Mr. WARBURTON said that it appeared to him
that the principles of the proposition of the Hon.
Member for Birmingham did not at all differ from
that proposed by the Hon. Member for Oxford,
but that it came before the House in a different
shape.--(Hear, hear.) He had already stated one
objection to the proposition of the Hon. Member for
Oxford, which was this—they might suppose a long
annuity divided into two parts—one consisting of
income derived during the period for which the in-
come-tax was levied, and the other portion derived
from that time which elapsed subsequent to the ex-
piring of that period; if they levied a tax, not only
for the period during which the income-tax was im-
posed, but from the period subsequent to that time
when the tax expired ; to -be consistent they must
levy it on the present ralue of deferred an-
nuities and reversionary interests. In 1841 an
income-tax for three years was proposed,
and it was now proposed to extend that period three
years longer—that was, in the whole, over a term of
six years. If they proceeded on the principle of the
lion. :Ilember, and converted terminable annuities into
capital, and determine, in the first instance, that the
period in which the income-tax should be levied shall
be three years and not six, having capitalised all
terminable annuities, the true principles on which it
ought to be arranged was this—that the period for
which all annuities should be chargeable ought to
be precisely of the same duration. To capitalise
income arising from three years' annuity, and to
capitalise income arising from perpetuities, the tax
should be imposed for three years, and all parties
pay a per tentage on the interest of capitalised
incomes for a period of three years. Let
them put aside, for is moment, the consideration
of interest. Take the income-tax of 1001. a year, pay-
able for a period over which the income-tax was levied,
say of a man who had a lease of three years' dura-
tion which gave him 100/. ; another man had an in.
come for the whole period of six years of 1001., there
was 3001. in the first instance, and 6001. in the second,
he meant the capitalised amount. In order to levy in
proportion to the capital for the whole period of six
years in both cases, the sum levied would be precisely
in proportion to the amount of capitalised income. It
was impossible to carry out the plan of the Hon.
Gentleman, and he should therefore oppose it.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
contended that the proposition of his Hon. Friend,
however benevolently intended, could not be carried
out. Some, no doubt, would be benefited, but the
provision would open a door to fraud, and would ma-
terially interfere with the general principle of the
measure, 1,700,0001. of the income-tax was paid by
professional men, and those holding Government situ-
ations. 3,500,000/. was otherwise raised. It would
Le impossible, without the greatest injustice, to make
any provision benefiting the former without allowing
cases which had quite as much merit in the latter class
to derive advantage from such a provision. If annu-
itants were to be excluded, persons would invest
sums of money in life-assurance offices for three
years, for the very purpose of evading the payment of
the tax, and just such sums as placed them without
its reach.—(Hear, hear.) He must call upon the
House not to adopt the proposal of the Honourable
Gentleman.

Mr. HAWES said the argument of the Hon.
Member for Kendal fell to the ground because he sup-
posed the income-tax as limited, whereas it was to be
perpetual. The only way to make annuities amen-
able was to make thu tax permanent, of which there
could be no doubt. It was nominally for three years
in 1841, so it was now, arid so it would be nominally
111 1848. He was altogether opposed to arguments
drawn from the belief of the temporary nature of the
tax, which he believed had been and was now intended
as perpetual.
Mr. &GLIONBY thought the arguments of the
Member fur Kendal, or of the Right Hon. Gentleman,
had not been fairly met. A man might dug reduce
his income from 3001. to 150/. ; and thus, though he
did not realise in one way, he did in mother, and
yet awid the imposition of the inconie•tax alto-
gether. There was another point to which he would
refer. The Hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. Hawes)
said that they might classify insurances, and it might
be said that a man might insure his life for 2,0001.,
and if he wished to desist fro a paying his premium,
on going to the office the C mpany would give him
the value of his poll( y. On those grounds,
then, though he must confess that he thwight