The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-05 00:00:00

NOTICES OF MOTION.

i
~~

Mr. WALLACE gave notice that on Thursday, the
18th of April, he would call the attention of the House
to the evidence taken in the Report of " The Select
Committee which was appointed to inquire into the ad-
ministration of the law in the Supreme Court of Scot-
land in the year 1840," and to the state of the juris-
prudence of Scotland as connected with the aforesaid
Court—and to move that leave be given to bring in a Bill
to reduce the number of Judges from thirteen to nine, by
abolishing one of the co-ordinate Courts of Review into
which that Court is at present divided.—Friday, April 19.
Also that the correspondence respecting the resignation
of Lord Carehouse, formerly a Judge in the Supreme
Court for Scotland, and now retired on an annuity for
life, as the same was circulated by the said Lord Care-
house and the late Lord Advocate for Scotland, and was
by them sent to many Members of both Houses of Par-
liament, be laid on the table of this House on Thursday,
April 7.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE gave notice that on Thursday
next he would move that any rule or order of the House
precluding the presentation of petitions on the subject of
any taxes or duties under the consideration of the House
be suspended during the present session.
Mr. WM. O'BRIEN gave notice that he would move
for leave of absence to the O'Connor Don.

Captain POLIILLL gave notice that he would more
for leave to bring in a Bill to enable Coroners to admit
bail in cases of manslaughter.
LICENSED LUNATIC ASYLUMS' BILL.

This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to Le
committed.

DUBLIN POLICE BILL.
This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed.

. -
THE TARIFF.
Mr. RAIKES CURRIE wished to put a question to
the Right Hon. Gentleman, at the head of her Majesty's
Government, upon this subject. When the Right
lion. Gentleman had brought forward his financial
proposition, he had stated in the most explicit manner
that it was the intention of Government to stand or fall
by the adoption or rejection of that measure. The ques-
tion then which he (Mr. Currie) wished to ask was,
whether the Right Hon. Gentleman intended to uphold
the main principle of the tariff—namely, the reduction of
duties on articles of general consumption, and more parti-
cu'•arly on articles of food—provisions and cattle—with
the same determination as that with which he intended to
uphold the income tax ?

Sir R. PEEL said, that he did say that when her
Majesty's Government brought forward such an impor-
tant question as the tariff, for the relief of the country, it
was brought forward as a Government measure, and on
the whole responsibility of the Government. He con-
ceived that was a measure of the greatest importance, and
that the income. tax was the foundation of it. He had spoken
generally of the income tax as the foundation of the
tariff. He.stated that in that there were modifications
which he proposed to make, and with respect to the
tariff there were many alterations which he might wish
to make, and he must reserve to himself the power
of doing so. (Cries of " Hear, -hear.") He
had brought forward those measures, financial
and commercial, with a sincere desire to do justice be-
tween thf producing and consuming classes of the country.
Subsequent reflections had confirmed him in the opinion
that, on the whole, the measures were good, and it was
his intention to uphold the general principles of this_Bil I.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL wished to ask the Right
Hon. Baronet whether the alterations to which he had
referred were yet ready to be submitted to the lions°, or,
it not, when they would be ?
Sir R. PEEL said he should inform the House
of any important alterations which he proposed
to make. He conceived it was necessary to com -
municate with different people, as it was desirable
to have the views of different parties. Those commu-
nications were still going on. He would, at as early "a
period as possible, communicate his alterations to the
House, and he thought he might say that, on Monday
next, he should be able to lay it all before them ; but he '
thought that the general principles of the tariff would be
adhered to.

FORGED EXCHEQUER BILLS' BILL.
On the Order of the Day for bringing up the Report
on this Bill it was ordered to be re-committed.

The House then formed itself into a Committee, Mr. and he had no doubt that the other gentlemen, to be
GREENE in the chair. appointed as Commissioners, were equally deserving of
Clause 1 having been put, confidence. He was satisfied the Government would not
Mr. BLEWITT suggested that an addition should be propose any person who was not deserving of confidence ;
made to the clause, exempting parties from serving on at the same time he would wish that something like
the commission, who should refuse to attend. expedition should be sought to be attained. Consider-
The amendment was agreed to, and the clause was ing how much the parties, whom the measure af-
ordered to stand part of the Bill. fected, had at stake, it was of the utmost importance
Clauses up to 4 were then agreed to. that this inquiry should be brought to the earliest con-
On clause 5 being proposed, elusion possible. While impresiing this on the House,
Sir THOMAS WILDE said he had an alteration to he was anxious to guard against its being sup-
suggest in this clause, and also on the subsequent one ; posed that be wished to embarrass the Government
and it might perhaps save the time of the House if he on this measure. These were the whole of the amend-
stated the reasons that induced him to propose the seve- ments which he wished to propose. With respect to the
ral alterations he had to offer. This clause, as well as publication of the evidence, of course as the Government
every other, should, he thought, be read with reference could not have any desire to screen any persons,
to the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when he could not see any objection to it. He was only de-
the Bill was brought in. He must own that he was some- sirous that the case should be brought back to the House
what surprised and disappointed that the alterations, he in such a form as to put it in possession of all that had
had taken the liberty of suggesting, should have been sup- happened in the matter, so as to enable the House
posed to open some objections to the Bill. In proposing to determine with justice what was best to be done.
them he had not the slightest intention of embarrassing the Therefore, he thought it necessary to submit to the
course the Government wished to take, nor was he aware House the amendments which he had proposed.
that any of his amendments would have the effect of The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said he thought the
in any way obstructing the measure. The present clause difference, if difference there was between his Hon. and
related to the duties imposed on the Commissioners. It Learned Friend and himself, was only as to the mode of
was, of course, of great importance that there should be no carrying his suggestions into effect. The object of the
question raised hereafter as to what was the intention of Commission, which had been issued by the Govern-
The Legislature with regard to those duties ; what- ment, was for the purpose of obtaining information
ever it was intended they should do ought to be clearly as to the mode in which parties became holders of the
defined. The interests embraced by the present bills. They knew that fraud had existed for a long
measure were very important, for it involved the ruin time ; fraudulent Exchequer-bills had been circulated ;
of many respectable persons, and though among the this had gone on for a considerable time, and there was
number of those persons there might be some possessed reason to suppose that some parties who had been con-
of such fortunes that the loss of forty or fifty thousand cerned in their circulation might have been cognizant
pounds would not have that effect, yet the measure of the affair. The object of the Commission was there-
was of vast importance. The object of the alteration fore to ascertain the history of those bills, and to trace
he should propose in the present clause, was the carving the inquiry from the time of their being issued, to the
out the intentions of her Majesty's Government, and no time of their getting into the hands of those who now
other. He had attended to the speeches made when the claim compensation. And he would now remind the
Bill was brought in, and as all discussion, or expression House that they were not enforcing any legal right,
of opinion with regard to the bill-holders, or as to the but they they were coming to ask Government to give
justice of that House indemnifying them, was then depre- them compensation in respect of the forged Exchequer-
cated by the Right Hon. Gentleman, he did not offer any bills which they hold. The object of the Commission
remarks on that occasion, though some statements were was to ascertain the circumstances under which those
made which he thought gave a colour to the case which did parties became possessed of the bills. He entirely
not properly belong to it. It was distinctly stated that agreed with his Hon. and Learned Friend, that
it was not intended to delegate to the Commissioners any no part of the evidence should be withheld
power or authority to offer any opinion as to the bills ; from the public. He thought, on the contrary,
they were solely to confine themselves to matters of fact. that the public should be informed of the whole of it,
Among other observations made when the Bill was and he could assure. his Hon. and Learned Friend that
brought in, it was said the House should be cautious in there never was the slightest intention, on the part of
indicating any opinion upon the propriety of paying the Government that it should not be wholly laid
those forged public securities, because it may involve before the public. The Commission would report
matter of great importance to the public. The ques- fully to the House the entire of the evidence as well
tion was, whether the loss had been sustained for as the inferences which they had from that evidence.
want of sufficient control on the part of the public His Honourable Friend proposed to introduce a
officers, and upon that principle, which he con- clause to compel the Commissioners to report the
ceived to be just, if a person had sustained whole of the evidence taken, and to lay it before
a loss on account of a principle, the principle ought to the House. Now he (the Solicitor-General) could
sustain the loss, and not the person who is made the conceive special cases in which it might not be judicious
victim of his fraud. It was desirable, for the to make evidence public. He could conceive that there
sake of justice, that a report to be made under might be cases in which such ' a course would
the authority of the Bill, should show the House prevent a full investigation of the subject.
whether any such principle or not should come But, at the same time, the suggestion of his Hon. Friend
under discussion. He understood the Bight Hon. Ba- was not liable to so much objection, that if the House,
ronet at the head of her Majesty's Government to say, and his Learned Friend thought it adviseable it should
that it was extremely important the House should stand part of the Bill, he should press his opposi-
expresses no opinion on the payment of bills, because it tion to it. He would, however, remind his Hon. Friend
would involve an opinion as to the consequences that and the House that if all the evidence were to be
might arise from an issue of forged public se- reported, it might interfere with a complete in-
curities. He (Mr. Sergeant Wilde) could not quiry ; and in his opinion it would be better
conceive it could be so, because the whole investiga- to leave the matter to the discretion of the Com-
don would be so conducted as to elicit the truth of missioners, as in all ordinary cases. There was never
the whole case, and nothing more. The sth clause the slightest intention on the part of the Government
directed that the Commissioners should by all such that the matter should not be fully investigated, and
means, as to them may appear best, proceed to inves that every possible information upon the subject should
tigate the truth with respect to the holders of not be given to the House. His Hon. and Learned Friend
the documents, and that they should from time had also suggested that a clause should be introduced
to time report to her Majesty's Government what for the purpose of compelling the Commissioners to
they should find concerning the issue, circulation, de- hear counsel and evidence on the part of persons urging
posit, and possession of such documents; and how the claims hgainst the Government. He did not cer-
holders of such received the sums upon them whether in tainly think that such a course would be conve-
exchange of other bills, or for money, what was the rate nient. Every holder of one of these bills might then say
of purchase, and whether the owner of such documents ao the Commissioners, that "he was the best judge of
received those sums of money in due course of business; the course to be taken relative to the inquiry—that they
also other matters to make known to the Commissioners. were bound to hear his counsel and his witnesses,
Thus, this amendment would put the House in possession for the Parliament had so enacted." Now
of several important facts, which the words of the Bill, he believed that in no former case had the
as it now stood, would not do, for they only charged that Legislature made it imperative on Commissioners to hear
Commission "to report what they should find." No doubt parties by their counsel. They had always been
the Right Hon. Gentleman who drew up the Bill, allowed to hear, at their own discretion, any par-
thought that those words would include the furnishing ties they might think fit. In his opinion, it
of evidence to that House as well as the conclusions ef would be better, after they had appointed Commissioners,
the Commissioners. But the two legal gentlemen whom to leave them to conduct the inquiry as they might
he had proposed to be on the Commission, would at once please. His Hon. and Learned . Friend had said that
see that the present provision would not extend to the the holders of the bills could not be interested in creating
furnishing of the evidence to the House ; but by the delay. Now that might be true of the greater part of
amendment which lie (Sir T. W.) proposed, the evidence them •, but would his. Honourable and Learned Friend
and also • all other matters which the Commissioners say that there were no parties whose interest it
should find, would laid before the House. In adopting might be to thwart the real object of the inquiry ?
this amendment the House:would act on the disposition that Was there no party who might be interested in having
was expressed by the Right Hon. Gentleman in the truth kept back, or in preventing the Com-
introducing the Bill, which was to give the most missioners from arriving' at its discovery ? He
ample information to the House, to collect all would remind the House that the Commissioners
the circumstances connected with the transaction, would not have to decide upon the matter they would
and to prosecute a most rigid inquiry. But while the merely have to inquire, and the House might afterwards
Bill as it stood did not depute the Commissioners to re- adopt whatever course it might think proper. He
port their opinions on claims of Exchequer-bill holders, hoped, with regard to that clause, that his Hon. and
his (Sir T. W.'s) amendment would. It was of Learned Friend would not press the amendment. As to
the greatest importance that all the evidence the other clause, referring to the publicity of the in-
connected with it should be laid before the House-- The _sieiry, there was no objection to it, if his Ho-
subject was of the very highest importance.—(Hear.) nourable and Learned Friend could point out
He had no doubt, therefore, that his amend- any convenient mode of carrying into effect. When
meat would be adopted, as it would supply the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said it was important
to tho House all those minute and practical details that it should be ascertained how the bills were
tt hich were intended to be furnished by the Right Ho- made and issued from the office, there could
nourable Gentleman opposite, but which, nevertheless, be no doubt that it was- important that it should be
the Bill as it now stood would 'not do. He known how they got into circulation ; but if he meant
was the more confident in his expectation that the present Commission should proceed in
as he was sure that no honest person could desire conceal- the same manner as the Commission that had just
ment, so far as lie was concerned in this transaction.— reported to the House, if he said that it was to go over
(Hear, hear.) He should also propose an alteration in the same ground, then ha (the Solicitor-General) could
part of the preamble. As it now stood, it was suggested not help thinking that it would be imposing a duty on
" that the Commissioners should inquire into the means the Commission which it was not the intention of her Ma-
whereby such documents came into the hands of the jesty's Government to impose, and which seemed) o him not
parties." He should propose to alter these words into to bear expressly on the question. There was no objection
" the means whereby such documents had been made and on the part of her Majesty's Government to the fullest
issued." Now, in order that the case might be laid as inquiry into the mode in which the bills were made and
clearly as possible before the House, it was necessary that issued from the Exchequer-office; nor was there any ob-
the House should know whether the fraud which had jection to the amendment, except that it introduced into
been committed, notwithstanding the exercise of due this Commission a duty, already delegated to another,
care and caution, and under such circumstances that no which had made its report, and laid its information
care or foresight for the future could by possibility pre- before the House. Unless the amendment were
vent the recurrence of such fraud, or whether the fraud altered, he should not be precisely prepared to agree
occurred in consequence merely of a defect in the system to it. As to the proposal that all the holders of
of management, which might be remedied for the future bills should be ascertained and placed in a schedule
by due care and caution, but unless the House were made by the Commission, there might be no difficulty in
aware how the person committing this fraud had been ascertaining the holders of the bills in a week or two,
enabled to make these bills, they could not form any and there was no objection to those bills being scheduled;
judgment as to whether the fraud had been occasioned by but it would not be right to confine the inquiry to
some cause inseparable from the making of these secure- such bills only as might be so scheduled as there might
ties, or whether it had been merely the consequence of be other bills, and they m.glit be thus doing an injustice.
an imperfect system. He (Sir T. Wilde) believed that He had no objection to the bills being scheduled,
the fraud was not occasioned by any fault of the present with - a proviso that such other bills might be
officers, who had merely acted on the same system that added to the schedule as might be required.
their predecessors had followed, but that it had been With regard to the other parts, lie hoped the Hon. and
occasioned by a defect in the system. If it should turn Learned Member for Worcester would not press his
out that that on which the public had hitherto depended amendment to the House. There was not much difference
as a test of the genuineness of these bills—if it should between them. He agreed it. the spirit of his Hon. and
turn out that the official seal, although locked up, Learned Friend's observations, that the result should be
was yet deposited in such a manner as that persons made as public as possible, and that the House would
could get access to it ; that, he thought, would go to form its own judgment on the result of the evidence,
prove that a want of due care and caution had been the and with that view he hoped there would be no difficulty
cause of the fraud. He was aware that there had been in framing the clauses when the proper time came.
a cernmission, which had already presented a Report ; Sir R. 11. INGLIS said that he would at the present
but they had not reported all the evidence presented to time abstain from giving any opinion upon the case
them. They only reported the evidence which they which had been so largely entered upon by the Hon. and
considered relevant to the subject matter of the inquiry
t ethird—thatand se second portions
which r
eo
h
Learned Member opposite. He thought that the Hon. and
on which they were engaged. But there might be evi-
Learned o Membereote,
hwas
withri regard in
thteo first
h
right
dente which, although irrelevant to that inquiry,
might be very relevant to the present inquiry, lated to the holders appearing by their counsel and agents, he
and if so, he should wish the House to be in possession Vjeezdotot, and wwoiutlictirneot givet his consent tol that amendment.
of it, in order that they might exercise a sound dis- and Learned Member, bustpteetdido t
agree wietharime wtratthoeo
i
cretion as to the manner in which they would deal was to be lost.—(Hear, hear.) He had no interest not only
with the holders of these bills.—(Hear, hear.) If those in Exchequer bills, but not even in the persons holding them;
persons had acted honestly and fairly, and had given but he thought it most cruel that there should be any delay on
full value for the bills which they held, the public the subject ; and, if not inconsistent with the forms of the
ought to sustain the loss which had been occasioned by House, he hoped her Majesty's Government would exercise
the misconduct of a public officer. It was known that influence which they must possess in endeavouring to refl.
that the individual called Rapallo held bills to the der the proceedings as speedy as possible—( Hear, hear)—if
possible, to bring up the report in the present Session. Some-
amount of 100,000/. Now he thought it should be thing ought to be done as soon as possible to relieve the bona
an instruction to the Commissioners to inves- fide holders, who, he believed, constituted the majority, from
tigate the claims of those persons, and to place the embarrassments and difficulties in which the late frauds
them in a separate schedule, and that they should had placed them.
be protected against the competition of holders Sir R. PEEL really thought there was no substantial dif-
who had dishonestly got hold of the securities. ference between the two sides of the House as to the course
He then proposed to add a clause which he understood that should be pursued by the Commissioners. Neither was
was subject to some objection—namely' " that the bill there any valid objeetion to the Commissioners appointed.
holders described in the schedule shall have liberty to The Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite had borne full tes,
attend to be heard by themselves and their Counsel before timony. ti? the acquirements, ability, and integrity of two of the
Commissioners, the Earl of Dev_o_nrand Mr. Stephen. In select-
the Commissioners, in such manner and at such
time or times as the Commissioners shall order and had
endeavoured Commissioner M
l 'sr of e'velitfre,ettihe tiloorveiTmleint
direct." Of course the Commissioners, like every chosen gentleman
atoo steheor clear
was in no degreeyi cononne'cted witht anyad
other tribunal, having the power of controlling the class supposed :be personallyw interested in this question, while
course of proceeding. The House would observe he had, at the same timea good deal of financial knowledge.
the extended nature of the inquiry proposed by the fifth He (Sir R. Peel) therefore thought that the House should
clause. It was an inquiry as to the manner of possession ; repose full confidence in the personal ability of the Com-
under what circumstances the bills were received, whether missioners. With respect to the production of ;the evidence,
in exchange or not ; what was the rate of interest, and he quite agreed with the lion. and Lea ned Gentleman, that
so on. Many of the persons concerned were entirely theess Report of the Commissioners would be unsatisfactory tin-
unused to legal proceedings, entirely ignorant what tey also gave the evidence to the House—( Hear, hear)—
questions should be put in order to arrive at a and he ( Sir R. Peel) would assure him that it never was in
given conclusion. Nothing could be more reason- the contemplation of Governmen_tetooewmitahohtddtheer
ridenacekeatst
able, he thought, than that all such persons should
tahgateneral principledv. The l!oh tl
n. G
t bear upon personws whoe,nif they
have the assistance of an attorney or of counsel wereson
motenoofwthe
yet nce
e ihead been in office; but he (Sir R. Peel)-
in examining and cross-examining witnesses. thought that Lconsideration of that nature could, even as the
The fifth clause required the Commissioners to report Bill now stood, operate with the Commissioners' so as to in.
their inferences and conclusions from the evidence duce them to withheld those particulars ; and if any proof
adduced before them. Unless then all those forms, should appear of negligence on the part of the Government
which were adopted in 'Courts of Justice, were a officers, in the making or issuing of bills, he could not see how
waste of time, justice required that the parties, the Commissioners could withhold that information. The Bill
whose commercial existence was at stake, should be heard i appointed the Commissioners, with "ar view to discover the
before that report was made. Her Majesty's. Government truth and inquire into the caset toiftneevteoyh
reportl , or owner
__ of
to her Majesty
could have no motive for haste in bringing the matter eery document, and r
making,fom time to
circulation, and deposit
to a conclusion which would not operate in a ten-fold of such bills." 6 Now the holder of one of those bills might
degree upon the parties affected by the Bill. There think i: necessary to show that no vigilance on his part could
could be no reasonable objection, therefore, on have enabled him to take precautions to secure him against a
the ground of delay. Justice appeared to him loss. In such a statement a number of facts might be intro-
to require that every man should be heard. (Need relating to other persons, but it would be the duty
If any were to be heard, all must be heard. In an inquiry of the Commissioners to allow the holder to go into all the
like this, to refuse to men with 30,0001. or 40,0001. details of the case; still he (Sir R. Peel) did not think it ne-
at stake the advantage of counsel, if they hceesiogarrcy
itlo insist that every partic.:e of evtiodoentcteo should be laid
thought fit to require seemed to him as if they were upon Commissionersiitiet%House. He thoughttietveorugh
y particle of theime pqat ive
desired to do what Sir Samuel Romilly said in answer its a principle e lcr ht
to
trheep report
whole of the evidence ought
evidence.
to Lord Eldon and another judge, that they wanted be reptrted, but he could easily imagine a case in which it
" hasty injustice instead of temperate justice." He might be of the utmost possible importance that certain por-
(Sir T. Wilde) could not conceive who were tions of the. evidence should not be given to the public ;
the persons that could object to his proposition, or what therefore' he thought the Commissioners should be
interest could be affected by it. Another clause which permitted to exercise a discretion on the subject. As a gen-
he meant to propose was, " that the said Commissioners eral principle, the whole of the evidence ought to be produced,
are hereby required to meet for the prosecution butrertainly the: Government and the Commissioners ought to
of the inquiries directed by this Act, at such ibe permitted :to exercise a discretion on the subject. They
ought, not to and at such places as the Lords' Corn- to be compelled by law t!ipublish every particle of
the evidence. He agreed with
hiustlion.ost Friend who had last
missioners of her Majesty's Treasury may appoint ;
and the said Commissioners are hereby required tI sg:tkesotbat xund epodition was of theevermy
consequence,
and
dtaornd
to report upon the several matters and things hereby re- by counsel.-_(A objected
lau ht.o)t givingwas
we partyknoawn rightho
vit'ombuech'the
ferred to them, within months from the passing of this speeches of —ociunsel ;lengthened out legal proceedings, and he
Act, or within such further or other time as the said Lords' thought •that the giving every party a right to be heard by
Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury shall name counsel or attorney, would by, no means tend to expedite the
and. appoint." He (Sir Thomas Wilde) had perfect proceedings. The Commissioners were gentlemen of high
confidence in Mr. Steven ,and the Earl of Devon legal attainments, and Le thought that on that subject the

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY MORNINGr. APRIL 5, 1842.

House might fairly trust to their discretion, while great in-
convenience and delay mightarise from giving every one inter-
ested an absolute and legal right of being heard by counsel.
He believed that each side of the House had the same object
in view, namely, that the inquiry should be as full and cows
plete as poistble, and that all the evidence on the subject should
' be laid before the House before they were called upon to decide.
Sir R. INGLIS explained.
Lord J. RUSSELL agreed with the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, that both sides of the House had but one object in view
on the present occasion. With respect to the first point which
had been urged by ,his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member
for Worcester, it appeared that the Hon. and Learned Solici-
tor-General had agreed to the introduction of the proposed
schedule, so that on that point there was no disagreement.
Then with regard to the second point, the publication of the
evidence, the Hon. and Learned Solicitor-General, and the
Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government, both
agreed that the evidence gene ally ought to be reported. He
(Lord J. Russell)sagreed with the Right Hon. Gentleman in
thinking that it might be excessively inconvenient to have
every particle of the evidence published; but he thought that
the Treasury rather than the Commissioners should decide that
point. He thought it was the duty of the Commissioners to
report every particle of the evidence to the Treasury, and then
leave it to the Treasury to decide if there were any special
reason why the evidence should not be reported to the House ;
therefore on that point also there was no material disagree-
ment between himself and the Right Hon. Gentleman.
Then with regard to the other point, namely, whe-
ther or not the parties interested should have a
right to be heard by counsel before the Commissioners.
He did not think that the answer given on behalf of the Go-
vernment was quite satisfactory. Tke established mode of
ascertaining the truth and justice of a case was by hearing
counsel—(Hear)--and it never was made a reason for re-
fusing to hear counsel that it would occupy an inconvenient
time. When, last year, they were discussing the propriety of
preventing delay in the Court of Chancery, it was not said
that the length of time which counsel occupied was a reason
for not allowing them to be heard. Indeed, it was believed in
the courts of law that the arguments of counsel were of
great use in embling the Judges to come to right decisions, and
he thought that the same assistance ought to be had in the
present case. It was possible, as the Learned Solicitor-Ge-
neral had said, that some persons might be interestedin causing
delay, but he thought it improbable that they could attain their
object by these means.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it was satisfactory to
find that the difference between the present and the late
Solicitor-General was reduced to a single point.—( Hear.) He
thought it was important that the whole of the evidence should
be reported to her Majesty, and that there should be a discre-
tion in the Government to withhold from general circulation
such parts of the evidence as it might be inconvenient to pub-
lish. He did not agree with his Hon. and Learned Friend op-
posite (Sir T. Wilde) as to the necessity, propriety, or benefit
of giving every person an absolute right to attend and be heard
by himself, his attorney, or counsel, before the Commissioners.
It was impossible to doubt, that as far as any evidence or com-
ments upon that evidence were calculated to throw light upon
the subject, the Commissioners would do justice to the public.
His Hun. and Learned Friend compared this proceeding with
what took place in a court of law or a court of equity, and the
Noble Lord seemed to think that there was an end of ill argument,
especially from a lawyer, the moment he alluded to the supposed
benefit of having the aid of counsel in any suit in a court
of law. But if the Committee considered what was the (refi-
nery course of proceeding in any court law, or in a commis-
sion, and would take the trouble to compare with those two
forms of proceeding what might take place under the present
in ,uiry, they would immediately perceive the absolute necessity
of leaving a discretion to the Commissioners, instead of making
it imperative upon them to hear counsel in every case. In a
court of law or equity there was always some single matter,
some question raised between the parties, which was considered
the issue between them, and to which, therefot e, the evidence
and the speeches of counsel were or ought to be directed.—
( Hear.) Where a commission issued to dispose of certain funds
2mong claimants, as, for instance, in the case of the confisca-
tion of property :n France, every person made.a distinct claim,
and the only questions were, whether the party was entitled,
and if so to what amount ? But he could conceive no limit to
the present in,uiry, as proposed to be conducted. Every per-
son might suggest a different mode of inquiry, and would have
a right to go before the Committee, and raise every possible
issue on every stage of the investigation. The holder of an
Exchequer bill, conceiving that he had important evidence to
give, might desire the Commissioners to follow his suggestions,
and if they refused, might make a motion for a man-
damus in the Queen's Bench, in order to compel the
Commissioners to hear his witnesses.—(Hear.) If ever
there was an inquiry which, by reason of its multifariousness
—an inquiry confined by no plea but wandering int ) every spe-
cial matter—ought not to be admitted, this seemed to be that
sort of inquiry. To leave to the Commissioners, on their own
responsibility to entertain any questions, and hear counsel upon
such points as they, in the discharge of their public duty,
should think important to the inquiry—to give to every person
the right to go before the Commissioners, and call evidence
to any extent, and to raise questions without limit, not con-
fined, as in the case of law or equity, by previous pleadings
or any specific issue, but wandering into an inquiry as to
the origin of the fraud—es to the carelessness of several per-
sons for a period of six years—extending even to the mode of
the issue of this bill, and the way in which they might have
got into the market—it seemed to him that all this would con-
stitute an inquiry without any sort of limit ; it would be but
opening a field for expense--he would not say litigation—he
would not disgrace the term by calling it litigation. Such an
inquiry would be a very multifarious one, and lead to no end.
It would be an inquiry by no means creditable to the wisdom of
those who had proposed the present measure.
Colonel SIBTHORP wished to know whether those Com-
missioners or clerks were to be paid—(Laughter)—and if
they were to be paid what was the amount? If they were to re-
ceive salaries, he should be happy to see a clauie inserted in the
Bill to the effect that those persons to whose negligence and
want of caution the transaction now under the consideration of
the House was owing—he meant comptrollers and others—
(Laughter)—should be amerced in the amount to De paid to
those officers. He knew that in many eases where a man had
been found guilty of some trifling act of negligence, he was
punished in various ways, sometimes by fines, and at other
times by imprisonment; he could not see, therefore, why great
public servants, who were often paid most handsomely for their
work, should escape that penalty which, in his (Colonel Sib-
thorp's) opinion, ought to be inflicted on them, and which, in
cases of minor misconduct, were almost always enforced. He
thought it right to make these observations, though he himself
never did have an Exchequer bill, and he would take care that
he never did take one.—( Laughter.) He hoped that those
who had misconducted themselves would be punished, and
amongst those he must include the Noble Lord who sat oppo-
site, and the Right Hon. Gentleman the late Chancellor of the
Exchequer. He trusted his lion. Fiiend would give him
some information on these matters.

Sir H. PEEL said, of course the clerks of the Commission
would receive such remuneration as thsir services merited ;
with regard to the Commissioners, they had undertaken the
matter vvithout any stipulation as to remuneration ; but he
thought that question should be postponed till they saw what
would be the duratior of the Commission. He must, how-
ever, say, that if they invited professional men of high cha-
racter, whose time was their property, it was too much to ex-
pect them to devote that time without due remuneration.
But they had undertaken the duty without any stipulation;
and as to the clerks, he was sure his Hon. and Gallant Friend
would not object to allow them sufficient remuneration.
The amendments were then in part agreed to, and the clause,
as amended, was ordered to stand part of the
On clause 6 being put,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said (as we understood),
that. he had no objection to adopt the suggestion of the Noble
Lord opposite ( Lord John Russell), and to leave it to the dis-
cretion of the Treasury to publish such portions of the evi-
dence as they might think fit.
Mr. WA LEY was sorry to hear that the amendment
of the Noble Lord was about to be adopted. He thought it
better for the public to trust to the discretion of the Commis-
sioners as to what evidence was to bo published, than to the
Treasury, seeing that the Treasury was a party concerned in the
inquiry. A report made by the Commissioners would be more
satisfactory than one made entirely by the Administration. lie
trusted the Noble Lord would see the propriety of altering his
suggestion.
Lord J. RUSSELL said, before he made the suggestion to
which the Hon. Gentleman alluded, he had understood it to
have been clearly stated that it was not the wish of the Go-
vernment to screen an)bod?.--( Hear, h ar)—on account of
any part of their conduct. fhe only reason he could con-
ceive for any of the evidence being withheld was this—that
some part of it might be, in the opinion of the Government, in-
jurious to the future circulation of Exchequer bills. On a
question of this sort the Executive Government was the best
',arty to decide ; the Treasury was responsible for the due
management of everything connected with the public credit,
arid on it the onus ought to lie. If they suppressed any part
of the evidence unduly, they would also be responsible for so
doing, while the Commissioners would not be so to the same
degree. For all these reasons it appeared to him that the dis-
cretion and the responsibility ought to be with the Executive
Government. Had there been any wish to screen anybody,
he should have supported the publication of the whole of the
evidence without suppression.
Sir R. PEEL said, the production of evidence ought to be
taken as a general rule, but the withholding evidence ought to
be an s exception, and the Treasury ought to be the party
responsible far withholding it. It would not be a valid ground
for withholding evidence, that any parties in power, or in office,
might be compromised by it, nor did he foresee any such ause
fur the exception arising. But they should not make it com-
pulsory to produce all the evidence, as some parts of it might
be injurious—such as that which might refer to the mode in
which the Exchequer bills were made.
Sir THOMAS WILDE agreed with the suggestion that had
been made; at the same time, it was essential to the justice of
the bill-holders that the evidence should not be withheld
altogether.
The clause, as then amended, was agreed to.
Clause 7 was agreed to.
Clause 8 was postponed.
The 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, and 13th clauses were agreed to.
Sir THOMAS WILDE, returning now to his postponed
amendments in clause 8, said no doubt that the House had
confidence in the `Commissioners. The House and the public
also bad confidence in the Judges, yet the Judges did not de-
cide causes without the assistance of counsel; if they did they
would soon lose that confidence ; therefore, confidence in the
Commissioners was no excuse for not framing the Bill in such
a manner as to prevent the possibility of a mistake, or an er-
roneous proceeding, in disposing of cases in which the whole
fortunes of men were at stake. The Exchequer bills were a public
security in which men had no legal remedy, and differed
from the remedy which attached to the issue of a bill of ex-
change. All possible indulgence should be,given to the inno-
cent holders in the present case. They only asked for the as-
sistance of counsel in laying the evidence before the Commis-
sioners, which was to decide them in making their report.
Men who were acquainted with law knew that the mode in
which evidence was produced often decided a case—to elicit
this evidence general intelligence and common sense were not
sufficient; practical experience and professional knowledge
were indispensable. Why then should the House refuse the
holder of a IEII for 1,0001, having no other legal remedy, that
legal assistance which a man would have in recovering a debt of
405.? The issues were! o those which his Hon.and Learned Friend
had supposed them to be. If the bona fide holders were not
to be allowed to go into the evidence, they lost the whole el
the case ; but it was said that the Commissioners would go into
the question. But how were they to do so. and what were
they to know of the case? They might as well say, leave the
cas s to the Judge, and he will decide upon it. Why, it was
only the other day that the Judges refused to him depositions
in any case which they had to try. But what are the bill-
holders to do? Why, his Hon. Friend said that they were not
to call evidence before the Commission. Who were to be able
to judge what witnesses should be called so well as they?
They might talk about the long speeches of counsel, and the
time that they would occupy; that was nothing new to him
( Sir Thomas Wilde), and he had often heard gentlemen of the
bar who were complained of for their long speeches, when they
got to the Bench were just as had themselves in complaining of
the speeches of others ; but the fact was, that every one thought
all speeches flat and dry except those which related to their own
ease. But this, after all, was nothing at all, when compared
to the important and pressing nature of the business. He had
no objection to extend the inquiry, as his Hon. and Learned
Friend proposed, unless the House were prepared to refuse
those parties the privilege of laying their case before the Com-
missioners by evidence, with the edvice of counsel. As to the
objection on the ground of delay, he cauld say, from what he
knew of the parties, that their cases might be disposed of in a
few moments. Some of them were bankers and traders of the

highest credit ; and amongst them was one gentleman, who
transacted business to the atnetm, of sixteen or eighteen mil-
lions a year, arid his case would occupy but little time. The
question really was, whether those persons were to have
the power of resorting to the means which the law and the
Constitution recognised for eliciting truth. Every one an•
acquainted with the administration of justice was aware that the
impression of evidence on the Judge and jury was very different
after hearing the observations of counsel, and he was convinced
that much time would be saved by conceding this claim.
It was said that these holders bad no legal right to have their
claims investigated ; that was certainly true ; but if ever there
was a claim founded in justice, the claim of an innocent bolder
of one of these bills was so founded, and if these persons had
no legal remedy, that was their misfortune. He trusted that
the Committee would not be led away with the idea that per-
sons would arise from no one knew where, to take up the time
of the Commissioners by claiming a right to be heard, or with
the idea that a multitude of issues would be raised if counsel
were employed. The only question that could be raised would
be—first, it the holder of the bill had received the bill properly ;
and, secondly, if the authorities issuing the bill had exercised
proper care and precaution. He should therefore move that
the clause be brought up and added to the Bill.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that the observations
of his Hun. and Learned Friend slid not remove his objections
to the clause proposed. His Hon. and Learned Friend's
argument went to show the right on the part of the bill-holders
of being heard by counsel. No doubt they had such right,
but the question was, if they would leave the decision to the
discretion of the Commissioners, or if they would allow any
person who chose to describe himself as an,owner of an Ex-
chequer bill to attend with his counsel and witnesses. But the
clause would not attain the object in view. How
could the attendance of witnesses be secured? There
was a clause giving the Commissioners the power of sum-
moning witnesses, and no doubt, on any party applying to the
Commissioners, they would exercise that power. But if they
left the summoning of witnesses to the discretion of the Com-
missioners, surely they ought to leave the question as to the em-
ployment of counsel to their discretion also. His Hon. arid
Learned Friend's speech seemed to say that they (the Govern-
ment) were opposing the attendance of counsel in all cases ; but
such was not the case; on the contrary, they (the Government)
contended that they ought to leave the decision of the question
entirely in the discretion of the Commissioners. What he
objected to was the taking out of the hands of the Commis-
sioners all control over these proceedings, and compelling them
to hear witnesses in every possible case. When the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman spoke of the power of the Commissioners
to report the result of their inquiries, it should be recollected
that they had no power to make any final decision—that would
rest entirely with the House itself. On these grounds, there-
fore, he must object to the clause proposed by the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman.
The clause was then brought up.
Sir R. INGLIS said it appeared to him that the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman desired to give to the claimants an advan-
tage which eas not sought by the Government, and on that
ground he thought the proposal objectionable, The Commis-
sioners would have no power to decide that such and such a
sum was due to a particular person, but would merely report to
the Queen, and thrraigh the Queen to the Parliament, that
such and such had been the mede of issuing Exchequer bills,
and such and such persons had been the holders of them. He
could not see why an advantage should be possessed by the
holders which was not possessed by the Government.
Lord EBRINGTON was understood to say that he thought
both the Goiernment and the claimants should be heard by
counsel, as they might think fit.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that he concluded the Government
would have the pawer of being hea; d by counsel, and he thought
it would be wrong of the Government not to have recourse to
professional assistance, while the claimants availed themselves
of such an aid.
Mr. W AKLEY said that the parties at all events should be
heard by counsel, as was the case upon all other similar oc-
casions.
Mr. C. BULLER asked why the House should depart from
the usual course of proceeding, and not allow the evidence ad-
duced on the various questions to be brought under the Com-
missioners to be sifted by counsel. It was only by the proper
sifting of the evidence that the real state of the facts would be
really come at.
Sir R. PEEL said the question was, whether or not they
would trust the investigation to the Commissioners, who were
most calculated to elicit the truth—whether or not they would
confine their instruction to them, or give a right to every
patty to be heard by counsel ? Of the Commissioners, one
had been a Master in Chancery, and must be a good judge of
the nature of the inquiry which was best calculated to arrive at
the truth. The other Commissioner, Mr. Sergeant Stephen,
in addition to his long practice at the bar, had served on the
Commission to Inquire into Real Property, and was,
therefore, well fitted for conducting such an inquiry.
It was generally admitted on both sides that by their integrity
and professional attainments, they were well fitted to conduct
the inquiry, and meet the ends of justice. If it was necessary
that counsel should be heard on the part of the holders, it may
be also necessary to hear evidence on the part of the Crown.
( Hear, hear.) he duty of the Commissioners was to lay the
evidence in the most satisfactory manner before the House, and
he thought it better to leave the matter in the hands of the
Commissioners, who, he had no doubt, would call counsel if it

was necessary.
Sir THOMAS WILDE said, that if the evidence was
legal, no. Judge in the land would have the power to refuse,
and why should Commissioners have that power ? It was
said that Parliament wat to decide on the evidence, but who
was to decide what the evidence was to.be ? He did Think that
would be a full, fair, and satisfactory way of proceeding.
It might be necessary for the holder to propose the evidence
of bankers, bill-brokers, and stock-brokers, touching his
ownership of a bill. Who was to decide which of these was to
be selected, and when? In his (Sir T. Wilde's) opinion, the
holders of bills should be represented by counsel, and so should
the Treasury.—(Hear, hear.) Let the. Treasury state their
objections openly to the bill-holders, and let the holders state
theirs by counsel. Was it just to prevent a party from bring-
ing forward any evidence necessary to make out his case? if it
was not just, why withhold those opportunities? Would not
counsel be heard before a Committee of that Howe? The
COmmissioners being ignorant of the case of the parties, and
of the case of the Government--being ignorant whether
the case arose from negligence, or from circumstances neces-
sarily connected with such, could not know where to send for
information; it was not safe to apply to either side, and
whatever they heard, ought to be heard in the presence
of both. Was the ordinary mode of proceeding in all
otherj cases to be withheld in this? It was illusory to say that
all would be dime that was riot ; it was not Parliamentary—
whatever was proper to le done ought to be expressed in
the Act. It was not safe to leave a clause of doubtful con-
struction. He trusted, with regard to the permission to be
heard by counsel, that the holders of these bills would not
be prevented from having recourse to the ordinary means
of justice.
Mr. V. HARCOURT was anxious to do justice to the par-
ties concerced,and he was st ill more anxious to do justice to the
puhlie. He would not willingly be a party to bringing the quest fun
before the House with a prejudice against either the holders
or the public, and from the strong opinion which had b'een
expressed by lion. Gentleman opposite that justice could not
be done unless counsel attended on behalf of the bill-holders,
he felt convinced that if the proposition were not acceded to,
the question would come before the House with a prejudice
against the public that full justice had not been done towards
the holders. The Hon Gentlemen opposite had said that
full justice could not be done unless counsel attended to protect
the interest of the bill-holders. Under these circumstances,
he hoped the Government would give way, and permit the
clause to be brought up. Although, if he were a holder of
Exchequer bills he should be perfectly satisfied to leave tl.e
whole question to the discretion of the Commissioners, yet,
considering the Learned Member for Worcester as the repre-
sentative of the bill-holders, and having heard what had fallen
from that Hon. and Learned Gentleman, he thought it would
be the least inconvenient course to accede to his proposition.
The only inconvenience that could arise from doing so wt,uld
be delay, and for that the holders would be answerable, and by
it they alone would be the sufferers. For his own part he
thought there would be ample security in trusting to the dis-
cretion of the Commissioners, and therefore he should vote
with the Bight Hon. Baronet if the question came to a di-
vision, but he had thought it right to say what he had said to
guard against a prejudice which he foresaw was likely to arise.
Mr. KEMBLE wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet
whether it was intended that the investigation should be open
to the public?
Sir R. PEEL repliedtthat was intended to be left to the
discretion of the Commissioners themselves.
Mr. KEMBLE said, that having undertaken to present a
petition from some of the holders of the bills, he had no hesi-
tation in advising them not to press to be heard by counsel.
There was one reason why he thought they would suffer in.
jury from such a privilege, namely, that if counsel were heard
for the holders they must also be heard for the Treasury. The
Government would thus be placed in direct hostility to the bona
_fide holders.—( Hear, hear.) As he could not see, therefore,
what advantage the holders would derive from being heard by
counsel. he would feel it his duty to vete against the proposal.
Mr. BARING said, he thought the parties had a right to a
full and fair inquiry, and full opportunity of Lying all the facts
before the Commission ; on the other hand, he thought the
public had an equal right to the examination of witnesses, in
order that all the circumstances of the case might be fully made
known. He believed, notwithstanding all he had heard, that
that object would be far more effectually accomplished by
both the Treasury and the parties being heard, than by leaving
the matter entirely to the Commissioners. He did not under-
stand how it was possible to hear counsel on the part of the
Treasury, and to refuse the bill-holders the same advantages.—
(Hear, hear.) He thought that no steps should be taken in
these proceedings without counsel on the part of the Crown, to
defend the interests of the Crown, and counsel, on the part of
the bill-holders, to defend their special interests, and he hoped
Government would not oppose the employment of counsel on
both sides.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said there was no clause in
the Bill requiring the Commissioners to have counsel on either
side. As the Bill stood it was quite in the discretion of the
Commissioners, and it was not to be supposed that they would
allow the Crown to be heard by counsel, and not allow the
bill-holders.—( Hear, hear.) The Bill was framed in such a
way as not to compel tha Commissioners to hear counsel in
any case, and yet to leave it open to them to admit counsel
on both sides, if they thought it expedient.
Mr. HARDY thought, that instead of leaving it to the Com-
missioners to say what parties should be heard by counsel, it
would be better to declare at once that all parties should be at
liberty to call in professional aid as they might think proper.
In case the Commissioners should at any time refuse to hear
counsel, if that power were given to them, this inconvenience
would follow—that the House would subject itself to the ne-
cessity of hearing the complaints of parties hereafter.
Mr. HAWES said that be did not think it advisable to leave
it to the Commissioners to decide what parties should or should
not be heard by counsel. They should then be told by those
parties, whose counsel had not been heard that the inquirieshad
not been fairly and fully conducted. The inquiry should be
conducted according to the ordinary forms in such cases, and
the parties should be at liberty to De heard by their counsel in
all cases in which they might think proper.
Mr. W. AT WOOD thought the Government ought to pay
the amount of those repudiates bills to the owners, provided
they held them in the course of honourable business, but con-
ceding that much, it was certainly the duty of Parliament to
examine into every circumstance which might throw susticion
on the manner in which the holders of those hills came by them.
Ihe holders were men generally of the first respectability, and
men who courted investigation. He could not see, therefere,
why they should refuse to allow them to conduct their case be-
fore the Commission in the manner theythoughi most advisable.
• Mr. RIGBY WASON knew of only one objection in tha
matter, and that was the delay to which real bona fide holders
might be subjected, by persons who were not bona fide holders,
coming forward with witnesses, and having them examined at
great length by counsel. He thought they could meet that ob-
jectim by d.rectiog the Commissioners to report from time to
time.

An How. MEMBER observed, across the table, that there
was a provision to that. effect.

Mr. RIGBY WA SON then wanted to know what became
of the objection.—( Cries of " Divide.")
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the Amendment ...
Against it
Majority —l3
The remainder of the classes were then agreed to, with some
verbal amendments, the House resumed, and the report was
ordered to be brought up t.,-morrow.

INCOME TAX.
On the motion of Sir R. PEEL, that the House resolve itself
into a Committee of Ways and Means.

Wl°
Mr. BLEWITT said the Right Hon. Baronet had P;Ls oft
a tax which had been received with universal execration 41,910 i
country.—( Great laughter from the Ministerial bencheseli; oti
Right lion. Baronet had attempted to make it palate west
holding out to the public the hope of certain ametidlefl4o
the tariff. A general feeling, however, prevailed, tbe'_.,4
Right Hon. Baronet would not be able to carry those.l;l,
ments, and remembering what hid been said by a Difeh',,.is )0'
in another place, that if proposition was made in 1,41
did not coincide, he and his party would be the first to tursrlit.
out, he (Mr. Blewitt) thought there was some ground
.fo_
opinion. He had seen in a newspaper a statement or tee Deal
I Member for Lincolnshire, to the effect that that Noble
told him that if he were to oppose the proposed ta
rtff
I would be modified and amended. He thought, therefaresartro
they ought to know what alterations were likely to be flecsee
out before they entered into the' question of the
tox —( H ar, hear.) The Right Honourable Barone „ea.
• '
I mated his deficiency at two mi lions and a half, an
.d I°Lffe
I that he proposed a tax which would realize 3,704.0%/Jus
" (Mr. Blewitt) could not consent to place such a large:ndo•
at the disposal of the Government without any certain "if tie
part
,"•J
• lent. He would, therefore, move, " That
produce of the income tax which has been lOW° ertser
her Majesty's Government is intended to form a tune g.
of to
I than is required for the public service ; that the adoKi"c,ese
said income tax, undr such circumstances, would
the people, already suffering under severe privation:lT:l
burden than the necessities of the public service rerielsssitee
that this House, therefore, will not resolve itself into C
on Ways and Means until it has been determined what am
of taxes shall be reduced or repealed."
Te SPEAKER bayi pth qon,
Mr. W Dng ut
e S. CRAFOR said he had ues
ativailed himself of„irlt
Easter recess, to ascertain the opinion of his constimenicse rtes
respect to the proposed tax, and their unanimous
t„, sees
that it ought, in every possible way, to be resisted. Th,e.'ooo.
some things, however, in the proposal of the Higt,ills, ses
Baronet which he could, not but approve. Arnoegst "` sit
isula•
the proposal to tax real property, which he thought %.
trosed
lieve the poor, by means of taxing the rich. He al" aP,ietseei
of the proposal to tax non-residents who spent their
foreign countries. He also thought it right that erciriwt
bt
the uide should be taxed for the benefit et the State. "vistO
thought there were disadvantages arising from this tate,esse
fully counterbalanced its advantages. The tax upeccotsad
arising trom trades and professions he thought we; e unj,,r be Fe'
oppressive, and taxing the capital vested in trade tow kes od
culiarly unjust. And, again, the amount of duty ta,
articles of consumption was not sufficient. In the )ea' ,iu
proposhon was made by Mr. Robinson to .13°. but,
income tax, which was supported by the different Partier-;ese°
at the same time, that Gentleman proposed , Anstlier
taxes on consumption, to the amount of 8,000,000 b,
objection to this tax was, that it was proposed for tae.Pon• Rat'
upholding monopolies ; and another strong ohiee.lt in 10
that it was proposed in order to support a war, Sc!"letitests,
(Mr. Crawford's)opinion, and in the opinion of bison' lositt
was unjust; and he thought the honour of that 11" use„ of the
best manifest itself by having a resolution declaratory din
unjustness of that war. Those opinions had been egreiiejtli°
resolutions which had been agreed upon at two meetiegs'
Rochdale, the one a meeting of the Anti-Corn-law -415°‘,Itbssel
and the other a public meeting of the electors and i"" on
of Rochdale. Although he disapproved of the proposltoodt°
the Right Hon. Baronet, he did not wish to be netletleell'e
approve of tits counter proposition of the Noble Lordbe
Noble Lord's plan upheld a duty upon corn, an t•
Crawford) never could support a budget which did I,re rich
,'
did not wish to be considered as being opposed to t°
Hon. Baronet as a party man, but he took that coursess
tire"'
he thought the interests of the country eel
t
without • any refirence to party. The Peerbeisb the
inclined to doubt the character of the relief "OW
Right Hon. Baronet proposed to afford them, because t'venee'
Hon. Baronet had given no notice of any increase of, rs'es4
neither had they any intimation from the Right 11°",.
Baronet as to how long this tax was to continu,,,s, 14‘,
was proposed, in the first instance, for three Ye' 4,,
there were no meanspointed out for the gettingl. 1";
the revenue after the income tax should be abolisheiissti
it to be by economy, by alterations in our colonial e,Ts'esil
•
reduction of the army and navy, or by what means? le'asps
not told. It certainly was necessary that the peal' seta,
know, before they granted this measure, what means e`eseetii,
adopted hereafter for their relief. He had thought it eit„iii
thus to express the opinions of himself and his colistie:
this question, to account for the manner in which be
vote.
W 144
The House was then about to divide, strangers
ordered to withdraw, when thP4l.
Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE rose and said 0.44
thought the motion of his Honourable Friend tt
of far too great consequence to he allowed a° Paso 513,te
in that way ; he should beg, therefore, very shottliitid
what his feelings on the subject were, and why he ib° %ter I:10
for the measure. They had heard that evening, in en„ssost'is
question with regard to the tariff, which was always
be part and parcel with the income tax measure, that.if °tot,
Hon. Baronet was not prepared to stand by the tart tilf he
before the House on the first night of the debate•
motion of his Hon. Friend was simply to the effettbich at
House ought to be acquainted with the duties nf ;mat
people were to be relieved. It was prevalent du cu'siet°'ir
country that this tariff might be postponed, or at anY for ille,e! I
be modified, but in the meantime it was said, " veaeL
come tax, swallow the pill; you must do that, or else
will be turned out ; vote for the income tax in theweit es
Now, was it meant to fritter away the tariff, so thatieter°l3
not be worth a farthing? He hoped that was not Wails
of Government, and he was sure the Right Hon. 14°,2! g
be obliged to him for giving him an opportunity of s%ilitetiot
ther or not it ever crossed his mind' te postpone 1",,,s
tax. The proposition of his Honourable Friend , 01€0
the people should understand whether it avast 11;1
that the duties, which had been before menti°°o;itiot
to the full extent to be carried out, or whether the rod 'er;
to be postponed. He (Mr. Duncombe) had understegetter,
the tariff and the income tax were to go pari pea% f &I,' it
and, indeed, he did not consider that the resolution° esetr;
Friend was one which should he treated with we TC"-srt•
with which it was about to be met, by the House,gliletsJ
division, without a remark from one of her MajestY"s„,
He thought, if the Right Hon. Gentleman wool rev
to read it, he would find that there was a good deal ° ..,s
justice, and common sense in it. sVi riff'
Sir R. PEEL said, the Hon. Gentleman ha-A Ise
d d
whether it had ever crossed his mind to postreereeitetset
Now, taking the question in the sense in which he,P't it °roe
had been put, he ai:swered, without hesitation, °lwo
had crossed his mind.—( Hear, hear.) There had fih
little delay in considering this tariff, in consequence Po°, but
terests of many parties who were effected having tots° hear' he
.and whose opinions, lie had already said, he wished At°, pelf
he had stated that he had great hopes that, on 10°11 statietidee
should be able to produce the tariff. And he ece lidpv
thought, with confidence, that the tariff which he sh"„urievil'had
on Monday would be considered to be the same I°,l sielaYralt
that which he had before brought forst ard. Tha`,e
erisen solely from a desire to hear those parties sthie•ti not fire
were concerned; but, as he had said before, he "' jeps
rdr
template such alterations as would be considered seY 'hies i,e
from the general principle. Now, in consequence co' so'
lay of a few hours, he trusted the House would of ott
that he was departing from the principles of the island"; IV
that they would permit him to bring in the Istib,sis 11,
the resolution before the House. It was quite c-ise deo'
tariff must he in possession of the House before d sto
could be called on to allow. the second reading t 505
should be anything which should appear to be le °Prleteitoes•
01
what he had before proposed, it would be quite :, the 1111
the House to oppose the second reading, and rejeco
sure altogether. That, however, he believed if ho,te,
question of the Hon. Gentleman—it was wheths rers
the income tax, he should postp- ne the tariff oest4,oi4 '
that such an intention never entered his mind. the t
was quite clear that the proposed alteration 0005.;
which would tend to lessen the revenue 1,200,0" u i5e074,0:,
an important bearing on the consideration of the not !Jilt
and he did hooe that the Hon. Gentleman w°"t',
to him the motives of getting, first the income, tbel'of
being a voluntary party to the postponement °+__cese _10;
(Hear, bear.) He hoped the House would not r;iocinv,,,,,!::
this preliminary resolution : they would bear ie_jusioino,l
opponents of the measure, if they passed the rreeso„.., !_oistir
have a full opportunity, on the second
8-!;:i
its future stages, of opposing it.— ( Heard' 0 P'co'll
of this metsure being met as had bee /too 0
universal execration, he thought on the contr., ter fr,„l ofd
mu nieations which he had received on the °Liii ger:it 5",,,
parties, that it would be met with general 00"osier'' is
prob lion. He believed that the sooner the r lot le", alt
manufacturing interests of the country kne,"':`,.e,lberoglihli
:li
the commercial policy sanctioned by the Legislatures,
the advantage would he to them ; ard he in"' ass deti,ge
said it in perfect good humour, that having hadi &gas. s"`;
after the holydays for that tremendous burst oaf_ilopiitae+; 11;cl
beingthey were
equally
satisfied,e d with that
e h
eepxepdl o teeny, he w sse
measure, and go on to a division, each bas
g !il
that he had in view.
Ut
Mr. E. ELLICE said he agreed in the cour,-°lO
Right Eon. Baronet had taken, and in the prinet Wooer cip!s.li,
he had acted, because he did not seesaidwhathis, bebo
he could have adopted ; but having • le tie° jJ
say that he could not concur with h,a,To. 00,.;
come tax. He thought what the Right al".„..sare!sle
should have attempted to do, under the present
.P.riactre
have been to have found some less objectionaeifjio t°o
which he could have brought the tax uponire;l.
,0,r4
venue, without having recourse to the old i Irro to
t°9sts,l
its irregularities, and its unfair le essure on !trawl
manity.—( Hear, hear.) Believing that soT_eniiiie
taken to maintain the credit of the country, 1,7..1 taonrh,s.l:ll
with the Right Hon. Baronet, that one of these etfr-slta
plying the deficiency must be adopted—theY4'ich ses!„',o4i
ther tax consumption Lthey must make that
s' "lobo+r
monopolists enter the Exchequer ; or they m
Hon. Baronet had done, propose an income, or_ rather
oti P'...„01
have been a property tax, and make those 'NB" soe c'21,4 1.„
were •ce se
the burdens. He thotight, also, that there s „ieh
.00
the budget of the Right Hon. Gentleman: , tirs
crease the deficiency of the revenue, and WtatritTon tee
the tat`„ %d
sexy. He could not see why they should ah tr'red
timber.—( Hear, hear.) He infinitely PrV.e Ho. kri lies;
which had been brought forward by his osite..,
year, to that of the Right Hon. Gentlemanro7,ch isle._ A
could certainly doubt the difficulties undaen
or 0(45
ote;
Hun. Friend undertook the duties of Ch iewt-0,1
chequer then; and last year his Right ,f_ro Gent iv 0.2
much in the same situation that the Right ne
to 014:11r?
now. He was obliged to propose measuresnurable 'Ol,
deficiency in the Exchequer. His Right e bet' io
hpryoptohseitißonig,htheHethnoenugrahhtl,e ought not toopoita:riew,.-I,a.tiveTbc,.l;eo4,
thought the calculations of his friends
was expected from those sources w. tutLey
0,1 are
gerated, he was convinced that in
principle u.t*AY thas6 edeP
heat that had been proposed, and
_hoe ht Hop. 0 1441
who
v ere ery creditable to tte.
_satovlrtonot ef' the tot.
who had proposed them, and to th
him
munity in thheegma,veantdheomn,
hbeishsailnf
thatth en , with
was respect
best,
andto the
h e stticoameftrebetdehtr the
it,cal uit:en:s , r
impose
oitieercial pa rjrc`i.lt:
ojeetki.oltie
duty on American timber at once byer+m" A
itiee joy'
When the elm_ mstances of the country Rin,er tort, dt
reduce the duties on foreign and Canada ti
e derived
act*
he could not understand why the revenue
source 0,11"
source shoul i be given up under p
dd notindai n understand heorwe
et
pitiful duty of or osictri
Canada, he thought that if the , Would fuliff00;(1
whoear
.7reWth sufferingr respect
euentdteor nhtetthihtePel eepdr:b:tesonsn; trfirhetetoasoetbflieritoleat.riceelfwri
ow;:dile:1;)11.--.011,11°;:be;vr,:
h
shillings on colonial wheat was removed it
ight sustai°iie
sate the Canadians for any loos ev
'hm hear.) r'ogbt tit
alteration in the timber duties.--.( bear,
tt
ho
ear
ep rtwi paesr tya
ntyatiri,n
thine
wsans not
roeidi
s could tmy be taxed in time of war
taxed at a no Kr
rte did nut see why it should not be ,eveste
5t
It was the source from which assistance C° and rif 1i
Iftuht°sper_i:::-LeTtfithevii 1n11:11)
the
be most easily drawn, under all circumstanc's't kast+..sinf
danger to the trade of the country. Rett; just ie`;
pert), was to be taxed, why should not they eerttiiii citriecii.;oo
He (Mr. E.) represented a large enulTtoiog
wished they were asked as to the justice r ss.spelists."'4,tl{
trade, or whether it was fair to put theras" togsto
that they must either say that they had nottuitart if_riv.ot;er
the sake of maintaining their credit, make :"; to ,i'•0.10.100
ought not. It was desirable they should eC,",cestal"ip 0+
principle with respect to a property-tsix, and "r, Ras
it could not be permanently.. miuntsmil. a?

ct had prpe
tocrationhsf,lhr
benches. /,_
it palatably
arnentlineet6t;,
railed, that,;
ry those are ft 4
a Noble
yde in whieh
t ~,
first to tura e.. 1,
ground for
rent of thell°.
tat Noble I.)frs
d tar; r
oP°se tbBt
therebre,
rot
sly to be Icrodo
of the I esti.
,e Baronet of,
if, and 10 06
a a large•
certain elrit'*o
at part (nj
bl
n prore re atcr
g
2 a of t-h
I
ad.l,ll°' se oft
tould hereotation, a
cfr
require ;
into Coniutll.`,o
ed what ale"