The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-06 00:00:00

bett Jeturoi

LONDON, THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 1845.

The House of Lords did not sit.

The House of Commons met at Four o'clock.

he confessed that he saw but little chance of its 1
removal.

The transaction of private business and the presenta-
tion of petitions occupied the attention of the House
during the early part of the sitting.
In answer to Mr. THORNELY, Sir R. PEEL stated
that under the reciprocity treaties, sugar, the produce
of the United States, would be admitted upon the same
terms as Java or Manilla sugar.
Lord LINCOLN stated in answer to Mr. REDHEAD
YORKE, that the cost of the new Houses of Parliament
would not greatly exceed the estimate, and that there
was every reason to believe that the new House of
Commons would be ready by 1847.
Sir J. GRAHAM stated, in answer to Lord RIMING-
TON, that it was not the intention of the Government to
introduce any measure on the subject of turnpike
trusts ; and in answer to Lord MAHoN, the Right
Hon. Baronet stated, that he did not intend to intro-
duce any measure to remedy the evils arising from
the interment of the dead in large towns.
On the order of the day being read for the House
resolving itself into Committee on the Property Tax
Bill,
Captain BERNAL OSBORNE moved as an amend-
ment, that the House do resolve itself into Commit-
tee that day three months.
Mr. Murrz, in a humorous speech, supported the
amendment.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER defended
he financial measures of the Governa ant.

Mr. EWART opposed the amendment, on the ground
;hat it was wiser to have recourse to direct than to
ndirect taxation.

Mr. D. BARCLAY approved of the property-tax, but
hoped that the increasing prosperity of the country
would enable them to do without it in a few years.

Mr. HAWES considered the continuance of the in-
come-tax as a great obstacle to commercial reform,
and should, therefore, vote against it.
On a division, the amendment was negatived by a
majority of 73, the numbers being—for the amend-
ment, 23; against it, 96.
The House then resolved itself into Committee.
On the first clause being put,
Mr. CURTEIS moved an amendment, the effect of
which would have been to limit the duration of the
tax to two years instead of three. The amendment
was pressed to a division, when there appeared for the
amendment, 17; against it, 69; majority against
it, 52.

A long conversation followed, during the course
of which Lord Jourt RUSSELL expressed his
determination to support the amendments of
which Mr. SPOONER had given notice, on a
former day—first, to enable traders to deduct from
the profits of their trade such sum or sums of
money as would have been a fair remuneration to
persons not members of their families for services
performed by any member of their respective fami-
lies; secondly, to enable parties assessed under
schedule D to deduct poor-rates and other parochial
rates paid in respect of premises used by them
for the purposes of trade; thirdly, to enable persons
to deduct from the profits of their trade the sums
they might have paid for insurances upon their lives ;
and, fourthly, to authorise deduction on account of
certain articles kept for the purposes of trade, though
such articles may occasionally be used for other pur-
poses ; and Lord SANDON expressed his agreement
with the principles laid down by Dr. BOWRING, that
the nearer approach they made to direct taxation the
more they consulted the public good.
Sir R. PEEL, in answer to Mr. WAKLEr, said that
with respect to the question as to whether the
measure would be continued beyond three
years, the time for considering it would be
when the three years had expired. It was,
however, ultimately agreed, that all the pro-
posed amendments should be considered on the
bringing up the report. The remaining clauses of
the Bill were agreed to, and the House resumed.

The Stamp Duties (Ireland) Bill was read a third
time, and passed, after a short discussion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER announced
that the report on the Property and Income-tax Bill
would be brought up on Friday.
Certain returns relating to Irish Railways were
ordered, on the motion of Mr. BALDWIN, and
The House adjourned at Half-past Nine o'Clock.

of Commons. It is a Centaur—half Parlia-
mentary, half departmental. It is partly official,
partly legislative. It is a power created—not even
by an Order of the SOVEREIGN in Council—but by
a simple minute of the Lords of Privy Council for
Affairs of Trade, which absolutely interferes between
Parliament and its constituents. It is a power that,
if it do not override, does yet forestal and prejudice
the privilege of the subject to communicate directly,
and in the first instance, with Parliament, on those
rights and interest of private property which both its
cwn statutes and the practice of the Constitution
have recognised from the earliest foundations of the
Monarchy.
It seems to us that there are substantive grounds of
objection to the whole affair of the new Committee or
Board. Sir R. PEEL, whose mode of encountering
constitutional objections and great principles is
always peculiar, brought! forward in a reply a most
vigorous defence of the Committee, their cha-
racter, their mode of doing business, and
their reports. We never read anything more curious,
or less pertinent. " The Hon. Gentlemen could
hardly, he supposed, desire any change in the Board
of Trade Committee, so far as the legislation of the
present year was concerned." Why ? Because it
was unobjectionable either in principle or in practice?
No. But " kis Noble Friend Lord Somerset had
said that all its Reports would be presented by
Easter. Good Friday fell this year"—(the Right
Hon. Baronet loves to be so accurate and precise on
small matters)—" on the 21st instant. To make any
alterations that could affect their legislation in this
matter during the present year would therefore be
impossible." He had, however, some consolation in
store for those who have suffered by the " Bulling"
or " Bearing" in Railway Scrip, so successfully con-
ducted for those who enjoyed the benefit of early
exclusive information on the judgments of this Com-
mittee, a cousin of Parliament once-removed, as it
were. Men who had lost thousands, by the unex-
pected sale, at any discount, of shares in scheme,
say No. 504, in consequence of some other
parties having been Mesmerically apprized of
the pending report upon it before publication,
must have been gratified to learn that Sir ROBERT
had actually "viewed, with admiration, the devotion
which his Noble Friend at the head of the Board
of Trade had made of his time to the duties which
were to be performed." For our parts, our "admi-
ration" is engrossed by the mystic agency that
transmits the most secret intelligence with such
wonderful promptitude from Downing Street to
Threadneedle Street, and over to Dublin. Then the
Right Hon. BARONET fell into another extacy of
delight at the last Report of the Board, which con-
tained some novel and highly important suggestions
for improved gradients. He had read this Report
with delight, and he kindly prescribed a perusal of
it for all cases in which gentlemen experienced an in-
ability to digest the maintenance of the Railway
Committee. This announcement, like its predecessor,
seemed to fall but dully on the ear of the House. It
was still as far from the objection urged upon him as
the last Antarctic Expedition was from home, at South-
ern Island. As a climax, the effect of which was to silence
all further complaint and allay all suspicion touching
the unimpeachable excellence of his Commission, he
finally declared that, "judging from the character
of the Members, and from their reports, he had a
very strong presumption in favour of the tribunal."
Now, really, this is not the way in which the
Minister should meet grave objections to the con-
stitution of a new, an anomalous, and a very com-
plex department of administrative economy, which
is to deal with two or three scores of millions of the
capital of the country. If Sir ROBERT be so bent on
Members enlightening and gratifying themselves by
the perusal of all the coming reports of the Commis-
sion at Easter, with all the reasons for their secret
decisions on the projects submitted to them—well
and good. Let Members wait over Easter to get
through them and the " hot-cross buns" of the sea-
son. But we trust that Parliament will require some
much more solid arguments than any Sir R. PEEL
has been able to adduce, ere it relax in its present
evident disposition to subject the vicarious deputa-
tion of the Board of Trade, to a full, searching, and
uncompromising examination, not only into the cha-
racter of its constitution and powers, but into the
mode in which its business has been already con-
ducted ; the causes of past exposures of its secret
consultations and decisions; and the guarantees pro-
posed, for preventing the recurrence of such clandes-
tine communications in future.

The conversation which took place in the House of
Commons on Tuesday evening, on the subject of the
constitution of that most anomalous and very unsatis-
tory body—the Board of Trade Railways Committee
—might well have been expected to determine in
more important results than any it actually led to.
Mr. GISBORNE'S objection to a resolution which,
without previous recital or declaration of any kind,
committed the House to a recognition of that Board's
functions and mode of exercising them, was very
well-timed. It was, as he observed, the first time in
which the House had been brought into any discus-
sion on the reports of that Board. He obtained from
Lord GRA.NVILLE SOMERSET a sort of assurance that
all the reports of the Board would be on the table of
the House before Easter, but the Noble Lord pet-
tishly remarked " that he was under no obligation
to give Honourable Members an opportunity of
expressing their opinions, generally, on the constitu-
tion of the Board." Perhaps not; but the announce-
ment that this porous Board (of the profound secresy
of whose yet unpublished decisions we gave a rather
notable example in an article of Dublin intelligence,
a few days ago), that this Board will be prepared to
give in all its reports on the two or three hundred
railway projects which have been referred to them,
within the next fortnight, would be quite sufficient
to found a reasonable opinion of its real merits; did
we know of no other grave presumptions against
them in the recent statement promulgated by Mr.
Commissioner O'BRIEN. Unless the Board at White-
hall have a. Great Western tender wherein to carry
all their schemes and plans, and a Great Western
monster-locomotive, moreover, to transport them
with the maximum of attainable velocity over the
railway of unobstructed official technicalities—we
are satisfied that the task they have im-
posed upon themselves is utterly impracti-
cable within their own limits. It is one thing
to digest—another thing to " get through"—a vast and
overwhelming mass of business. We demur to the
redemption of the Noble Lord's promise by this Com.
inittee, as impracticable, humanly speaking; and w
have yet to learn that angels sit at this Board, to
effect that which is not possible by human means.
There was much of sound sense and reason in what
Mr. HA wEs said, as to the necessity of bringing spe-
cifically under the notice and deliberate discussion of
the House the constitution of a body " which had
great powers of deciding on vast masses of property,
and, as now constituted, he did not think it stood on
a satisfactory basis." A satisfactory basis ! No, in-
deed. How should it, under a constitution which
affirms or rejects a given scheme by the votes of the
Commissioners present at the settlement of the report ?
Thus, as Mr. HAWES showed, it might happen that the
President andVice-President of the Board of Trade, the
ex officio members of this Board, after having voted
against a scheme of railway in its progress through
the Board's hands, might yet have at least by their
vote, if not by speeches, to support in Parliament a
report in its favour, they being responsible for that
report. This is worse than a mockery; it amounts
to a positive deception on the Legislature. " Then
the decisions are secret," added Mr. HAWES, who
was certainly justified in availing himself of this fea-
ture in the theory of the Board's construction, as if it
was a practical fact, in order to give more cogency
to his argument against the imperfections of this
system of dispatching railroad Bill business. We,
who take leave, with such evidence as the public has
been scandalized by having brought under its own
eyes, to deny altogether the practical fact; who assert
that the decisions of the Board have been neither
secret before promulgated, nor unanticipated with mi-
raculous precision before recorded, even—are content
to rest our protest against the proceedings of the
Board on the admissions of its advocates and defenders.
We complain, first, that the decisions are announced at
the Board, with closed doors; secondly, that the parties
interested have no means, on the same account, of know-
ing whether the facts and arguments in which they
have all along confidently reposed their case and ha-
zarded an outlay, more or less considerable, of their
money, have been duly stated to, and fairly considered
by the Board. In a turnpike-road, dock, or canal
Bill, the parties for and against would have ample
opportunity of being present at the whole evidence,
argument thereon, and announcement of the finding
of the Select Committee on their Bill. Why should
the same privilege be denied to the parties to a rail-
way project? What are the superior pretensions of
the Board of Trades' Deputies or Commissioners to
those of a Select Committee of gentlemen representing
various constituencies in or about the locality of the
undertaking on the merits of which the House of Com-
mons desires them to report ? There can be but one
solitary principle on which the Board of Trade Com-
mittee can have a primei facie preferable claim to confi-
dence. It may be that, a priori, it is to be assumed, they
are less likely to be interested parties in such under-
takings than country gentlemen. But it would argue
a degree of pastoral simplicity in those who can be
credulous enough to take this lofty disinterestedness
for a grave fact, after the wondrous specimens we
have had of Stock-Exchange clairvoyance, whose
faculty of preternatural perception has so often pene-
trated all the way from Bartholomew-lane, right
through countless streets and lanes, and barriers of
stone, brick, and mortar, into the penetralia of the
Railway Committee's cabinet, so as to peruse reports
in the very act, and even while awaiting the very
act, of the Commissioners' subscription. Another
head of constitutional objection to the components
and organisation of this Board is—that-it is the most
palpable anomaly which ever slipped down, unper-
ceived, the open throat of a dozing House

Accounts from Madrid of the 26th ult. state that General
ORIBE, who had been dismissed from the command of the
Basque provinces for not putting ZURBANO'S son instantly
to death, according to general orders, had been tried by a
court-martial and honourably acquitted. The Cortes did not
meet on the 26th.

The following is the state of the Funds on that day :
Three per Cents., 37i Cash, 341 for the Account ; Five per
Cents., 25, at 60 days ; Coupons, 27, at 60 days; Passive, 7i,
at 60 days. Exchange on London, 37g.

The proposed conversion of the Five per Cent. Stock forms
almost the only subject of discussion in the Paris papers.
As might be expected, it excites much interest throughout
France, for though expected and feared for some time, a gene-
ral belief prevailed that years would elapse before it could be
carried into effect. Now, the conversion is regarded as cer •
tain, if not this session at the very latest the next. The sen-
sation created had caused a great depression of that stock.
But a few days ago it was quoted at 122 f., while on Tuesday
it had fallen to 119 f. 20c.—a fall of nearly three per cent.
The accounts from Zurich are to the 28th of February. On
that day, the debate on the Jesuits was resumed ; and, after
much discussion, a vote was taken on the main question,
which was decided against the Jesuits. Ten cantons and
two half cantons voted for the expulsion of that body, while
eight cantons and two half cantons voted that the question
should be left for the decision of each individual canton
The principal speaker on the 28th was Colonel Luvisii,Deput;
for the Italian canton of Tesino, who made an excellent
speech, and was loudly cheered. He said, " The canton
which h e represented was entirely Catholic, and that the Ca-
tholic religion was there the'religion of the State, hut that the
canton had not hesitated to demand the expulsion of the Je-
suits. The people of his canton," he added, " did not regard
the question of the Jesuits as a religious one. On the contrary,
they felt that the Jesuits had more than once compromised the
Catholic religion by their absurd doctrines, and had excited
dangerous dissensions. This was so true, that a chief of the
Catholic Church had, by a remarkable bull, suppressed the
order, and proclaimed to the world that he did so entirely in
the interest of religion. He might be told, perhaps, that if one
Pope had suppressed the order, another had restored it, but it
should not be forgotten that when-Pius VII. did this, he was
more than eighty years old, and in a debilitated state of mind,
from physical sufferinglas well as age. The question was
strictly a political one. The Society of Jesus, already power-
ful by the means that it 'possessed, and its extensive rela-
tions, making war upon 'liberal institutions, whether mo-
narchical or republican, and already having a footing in
several parts of the territory of Switzerland, was desirous
of covering the whole of the cantons with its occult in-
fluence. The Jesuits were the declared enemies of civil
liberty, of the liberty of the press, and of the education
of the people at large, under the surveillance of the civil
authorities. They sought, by extending more and more
their dangerous power, to stifle the liberty which had been
acquired by the regenerated cantons. They were, in fact, the
most powerful auxiliaries of despotism, and, therefore, the
people of Switzerland had reason to fear them, and to demand
their expulsion from a country which was the centre of a wise
progressive liberty. The Jesuits had been'invited to Lucerne
and if the way were deluged with blood and covered with
with dead—if the cries of desolation pursued them in their
course, still would they persevere, unless checked by the
strong hand of power. It had been said, indeed, that the
numbers of these bons peres summoned to Lucerne was only
seven. But the Diet should not forget that when LoYor s.
founded the order, he had at first only twelve disciples.
Fifty-eight years afterwards the number of Jesuits exceeded
10,000, and at the end of a century 19,000. They had 300
residences and 600 colleges; they had invested Europe, and
had obtained a footing in the new world. This was history,
and it should serve as a warning. If the Jesuits were allowed
to get into Lucerne, they would not stop at that point."
Three other deputies spoke on the same side. They were
replied to by the deputy of the Valais, who addressed the
following menace to the cantons which call for the expulsion
of the Jesuits :—" Only come to the Valais," said he, " and
we will receive you in arms. You wish to raise the Govern-
ments which are compromised, and you find no better means
than wishing to impose your will upon populations who know
how to resist you."
After this speech the sitting was adjourned.
A correspondent of the Commerce announces as follows the
result of the subsequent sittings—
" We have this instant received the news of the vote of
the Helvetic Diet on the Jesuit question. Ten cantons and
two half cantons were of opinion that this question should
becomo federal, and that the Diet should pronounce the ex-
pulsion of the order, not only from Lucerne, but from the
whole of Switzerland. Eight cantons and two half cantons
voted in favour of the question remaining eantonal. Two can.
tons, St. Gall and Geneva, gave it as their opinion that
the cantons which had admitted the Jesuits should be recommended
to send them away, but they refused to come to a definitive reso.
lution on the question of declaring if the Diet ought itself to order
their expulsion. It is evident from what precedes that the cantons
which desire to kelp the Jesuits have not the majority, and that
they cannot hope to obtain it; for even if St. Gall and Geneva
should at last incline to that side, an equality of votes only could
be the result. It is probable, on the contrary, that the cantons

Mr. F. BARING condemned the financial policy of the
Government which had rendered the continuance of
the-income-tax necessary. He did not see how they
could do without it, unless they imposed two mil-
lions of additional taxation, and that was his only
excuse for voting for its continuance ; but he had a
decided objection to the income-tax being made a
part of the permanent taxation of the country, but

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH? 3, 1845

which desire to see the Jesuits expelled by the Diet, will in the end
gain the advantage. The public mind is so violently agitated at
present in Switzerland, and particularly in the cantons of St. Gall
and Geneva, that it is difficult to imagine that the Grand Councils
of these cantons, which have given the instructions that have been
just followed, shall not soon find themselves forced to act. But it
will be sufficient for one of these states to join those desirous of the
general expulsion of the order to give the latter the majority in the
Diet.''

Great excitement prevailed in the Stock market at Paris
on Tuesday, and a large amount of business was done in the
Five per Cents. The mania for speculation in railway shares
is still on the increase.

The Five per Cents. closed at 119 f. 20c. ; the Four per
Cents. at 108 f. 50c. ; and the Threes at 85f. ; New Loan, 86f. ;
Orleans Railroad Shares, 1,290 f. ; Rouen, 1,162 f. 50c. ; Havre,
975 f. ; Spanish Active, 35 ; Threes, 40% ; Belgian Five per
Cents., 104%.

THIS \DAY'S NEWS.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-(THIS DAY.)

The House sat to-day to hear Scotch appeals. The Peers present
were Lord Brougham, Lord Cottenham, and Lord Campbell. Lord
Campbell presided.