The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1852-12-21 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIKAIENT. ¶ a reckless indifference and disrecard of consequences which
they cannot too highly censure."
The Stamp Duties on Patents for Inventions Bill was
read a third time and passed.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—TUESDAY, Dux. 14.
In the absence of the Lord Chancellor, who was unwell,
Lord Lyndhurst took his =eat on the woolsack.

MINISTP.RIAL

POLICY

The Earl of WICKLOW moved for certain returns con-
nected with the payment of the Income-tax in Ireland.—
The EA.' of DERBY had no oljection to the returns, and
I thst the momentous question of direct
)e speedily decided by the other house.—
e then agreed to

earneFtly

taxation wou

Lord tiroxTlikoLm moved for certain returns connected
enue and taxation, and deprecated the substitution
of direct for indirect taxation.—The Earl of DERBY de.
ferded the nolinv nursued by the Government, hut had no
—lion of the returns.—The motion

with 1.,

ection to the prod

was then agree

THURSD .k.Y,

T)ECEMBER IG.

THE MADIAI.
In reply to a question, Lord STANLEY stated that the
government had received communications from Sir H.
Bulwer in regard to the two Madaii, and that there was a
reasonable hope of their release.

THE DIVISION ON THE BUDGET.

The following is a list of division on the resolution
proposed by Ministers, that from the sth of April next
the inhabited House-duty shall be at the rate of Is. GI. in
the pound on all private dwelling-houses from the value of
£lO a year, and ls. in the pound on all shops and other

places of business, beginning at the Faroe limit. •
were for the motion 283, against it 337 majority 19

THE HOUSE-TAX.
The house having resolved into a Committee of Ways
and Means on the inhabited house duties, a preliminary
discussion arose upon a paint of form, on a suggestion by

4nd, Sir T D
C B
Anne,,l,”.•, Earl or
Arbqi unot. Hn
4- '!'e C 31

u A IT,

a?er, Sir 'W.
717.1(1, J W
C Hay

I Fre,i-
-" 'Frew.

ssell, that the u

aal course o'

,arted

y apart of the

to the committee ; and t

.esolution should be put entire, so

se alight have

act pro

1113 C4:vernm:nt.—The CHAIRMAN saic

cbairmai

" no," and from

irman)

the point

ch the mo

an anaeni

scussion

lore he

point of

Tecl to 1-c

hf!ravr;
Iv" or

aym had occu-
wirqo of

pied up ;cards of ar

ROS 3 S

e read. This w

Morgan, Octavius

viQe, ,unt
.1 AI

B u as ,

ordingly done,

el

ate was res

H
r.l

Sir A. COCK-

Wil

attributed the embarrassment into which the
aestion had fallen to the shifting and vacillating conduct
of the Government. If taxes were to be remitted, there
were some which might be removed within the margin of
With respect to the whole Budget, with two
__le tea duties and the graduation of the In-
come-Tax, which he warmly commended, all was barren.
—Mr. WBITESIDE controverted the argument of Mr.
Gladstone and Mr. Goulburn, that the taxing Irish funded
property and official salaries was a gross breach of national
faith and public credit, and justified the exemption of the
land in Ireland, the taxing of which, be said, would be to
add injustice to injustice.—Mr. Was TESIDE defended,
upon constitutional as well as economical grounds, the
extension of the house-tax to £lO houses, of the justice of
which, he believed, the country was convinced.—After
some further discussion, in which Lord Drumlanrig, Mr.
Blair, and others took part, Sir F. BARING concurred
with Sir C. Wood and Mr. Goulburn in thinking that the
reduction of the malt duty would produce but little bene-
fit ; that the surplus of the Chancellor of the Exchequer
was a very doubtful one ; that the application of the
income-tax to the Irish funds was a breach of public
faith ; and that the finances of the country would be left
by the budget in a position not sufficiently secure. He

, "NV

,
H

I,r--o of 10

J ~ L:i

t;~ a-~bti

Winiarn IC

a;.k,N"

[le surplu

Jos

- •
21 at some length the details of the house-tax,

0, C N

.
the proposed modifications of the income-tax, and con-
tended that if there was an honest intention on the part
of the Government to carry out their principles, the
resolutions must be withdrawn and reconstructed.—The
ANceLLou of the EXCHEQUER said that after four
days' debate he had listened to nothing which, in his
had successfully impugned the policy he had
_..dad, and he was prepared to show that the ob-
jections urzed against it were entirely unfounded and

Benho

opinion,
recommi

er, J

Chas Wm
elnt

lward P.
Lord

Pa! ter, I

He first addressed himself to the subject of a
_ _

.:chequer Loan Fund, of which he had taken £400,000
as ways and means of the year. He explained the origin
of this establishment (which he proposed to abolish), and
observed that, he found in this department a balance cf
upwards of .E 380,000 lying idle, and he stated cases in
which, he said, the minister of the day had availed him-
self of this public fund, virtually without the cognizance
of parliament, and sums had been squandered which had
escaped the vigilance of even Mr. Hume. £250,000 had
been lent to the Thames Tunnel, of which net a shilling
had been repaid. Battersea-park, one of the most woful
of speculations, had had an advance of £150,000. He
had a catalogue of parallel instances, from 1824 to 1850,
in which a sum very little short of £700,000 had been
advanced,—not, as Sir J. Graham alleged, to country
gentlemen,—every shilling of which had been lost to the
country. He then noticed the second arrangement of his
financial statement by Sir C. Wood, namely, the mistake
he had been supposed to make in the estimate of defici-
ency in 1854-55, through the semi-repeal of the malt duty,
which he showed he had properly assumed at 'X1,700,000.
Respecting the Caffre war, the statement he had made,
he said, had been entirely substantiated, the last despatch
of General Cathcart stating that " the war of rebellion
may now be considered at an end." He replied to Mr.
Goulburn's objection that no allowance had been made
for the loss of revenue by refining sugar in bond, that he
did not believe there would be the slightest loss. Ap-
proaching the subject of the House-tax, he ranged rapidly
over those parts of our colossal system of taxation which
had to be accommodated to the policy of unrestricted
competition, observing that the Government had to fix
upon some direct tax to enable them to carry out financial
reform ; and he retorted with great keenness the charge
of endeavouring recklessly to increase the direct taxation
of the country upon Sir C. Wood, who had proposed one
day to double the Income and Property Tax, and next
day told the House he had sufficient ways and means
without it. In providing an amount of direct taxation
for their purpose, the Government were guided by two
principles—first, as regarded the Income-Tax, to establish
a distinction between realized and precarious incomes ;
and, secondly, to enlarge the basis of direct taxation.
Believing that the House-Tax was a reasonable, just, and
beneficial measure, and that it would supply the necessary
amount of direct taxation, they had to decide upon which
group of indirect taxes they should operate, and they
came to the conclusion that they should act upon those
articles which entered into the consumption of the people,
and which were subject to the largest impcst. His selec-
tion of the malt duty he defended against the varied at-
tacks made upon it. His opinion was that the surplus
revenue of the country would be very considerable at the
end of the year 1854-55 ; he believed, too, that a great
saving might be effected in the public expenditure, and
he pointed out instances in which administrative reforms
had been or might be accomplished, very considerable
retrenchments being practicable, he thought, by the year
1854-55 ; and it would be the fault of the House of Com-
mons if in that year it did not find the public service more
efficient as well as less costly. The coalition by which
the present Government was opposed might, he observed
in conclusion, be successful ; but it had been always
found that the triumphs of coalitions were very brief ; and
he appealed from that coalition to the public opinion of
the country.—Mr. GLADSTONE animadverted with strong
emphasis upon the license of language which Mr. Disraeli
had used, and the phrases he had applied to the characters
of public men. After condemning the course of pro-
ceeding adopted by the Government with reference
to the resolutions, he objected, he said, to the re-
solution before the Committee. whether it was a vote
for a House-Tax or a vote for the Budget. He
enumerated specific objections to the House-Tax, for
which he would not legislate until all these questions
had been fully considered. He showed how severely the
additional direct taxes would affect persons with small
incomes, some of whom, including the clergy, would come
for the first time within the sweep of the Income-Tax.
He objected to the additional House-Tax, because it was
connected with the repeal of half the Malt-Tax—a mea-
sure which was professedly for the immediate benefit of
the consumer, whereas it was a sacrifice of £2,500,000
for a reduction in the price of beer that would be scarcely
appreciable, and the principle of reproduction would con-
sequently be dormant. He voted against the Budget not
only because he disapproved, on general grounds, of its
principles, but emphatically because it was his firm con-
viction that this was the most perverted Budget in its
'tendency and ultimate effects be had ever seen, and if the
house should sanction its delusive scheme, the day would
come when it would look back with bitter, and late though
ineffectual repentance.
The committee then divided—
Ayes
Noes.... ...... • •

Majority against Ministers...... 19
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it would be
for the convenience of the house if it was adjourned till
Monday, and this was accordingly agreed to.

11)hert T
?pacoel.c, G •i

THE RIVAL CHANCELLORS.—The following extract
from the speech of Mr. Disraeli, on Thursday, is a
withering rebuke to the self-sufficiency of Sir Charles
Wood The right hon. gentleman charges me with
making a proposal recklessly to increase the direct taxa-
tion of the country. Why, there is the Minister who,
with his property and income tax at its full amount, and
with a window tax that brought him in £2.000,000, came
down to the House of Commons, and, to an amazed and
startled assembly, proposed to double the income-tax.
(Tremendous cheering on the Ministerial side, which
lasted for some time.) Recklessness ! Why, I look upon
recklessness to be a carelessness as to consequences—as
the conduct of a man who has not well weighed the en-
terprise in which he has embarked. (Loud laughter.)
Why, if the right hon. baronet had carried that duplica-
tion of the income-tax, we should have heard of it as a
question of only an innocent amount. (Renewed laughter.)
But, if he had carried his proposition, I certainly think
that be might be fairly charged with recklessnes. (Im-
mense and prolonged cheering from the Government
benches.) But the most curious thing is that the Minis-
ter
who came forward to make a proposition, which ought
only to have been made at some grave conjuncture, at the
very first murmur of opposition he withdrew his proposi-
tion. (Renewed cheering.) Talk of recklessness ! Why,
what in the whole history of finance is equal to the reck-
lessness of this Minister ? (Great cheering.) And what
were the grounds upon which the right hon. gentleman
withdrew that monstrous, that enormous proposition—
which only the imminent peril of the State could have
demanded ! (Cheers.) Why, when he wes rebuked,
battled, humiliated, he dared to come forward before the
House of Commons and say that he had a sufficient re-
venue without having recourse to it. (Renewed cheer-
ing, which lasted for some minutes.) Why, the future
historian will not be believed when he tells the world that
the Minister came down one day to propose almost to
double his income-tax, and then, when his demands were
refused, he came down and said that he had already suffi-
cient ways and means. (Tremendous cheering.) And
then the right hon. baronet tells me, in language which is
scarcely parliamentary, that I do not know my business.
(Renewed cheers.) He may hove done his business ;
the House of Commons, however, is the best judge of
that. I care not to be his critic, but if he has learned
his business, he has yet another thing to learn—he has to
learn that petulance is not sarcasm, and insolence is not
invective." (Renewed cheers.)
A QUAKER TOSSED IN A BLANKET.—This feat was
performed a few days ago in a public grammar school at
Bromsgrove, in the absence of the head master, the Rev.
J. D. Collis. A message was conveyed to a confectioner of
the town named Dell, a quaker, that one of the boarders
at the school wished to see him. Mr. Dell accordingly
proceeded to the school, where he was immediately seized,
bound in a chair, and carried to the playground, where
they tossed rim in a blanket or rug for—according to Mr.
Dell's account—nearly half an hour, when he became
quite exhausted, and was set at liberty.
OUR NATIONAL DEFENCES.—WhiIe recently making
a tour of the coast along the channel, it struck me that
it would greatly assist our means of defence, if aline of
electric wires were laid round the coast, connecting the
different batteries, ports, military stations, and light-
houses. In many parts there are already lines along the
railways ; but in case of alarm, much time would be lost
in reaching the stations, and they are in disconnected
portions. It would, therefore, be better to have a line
exclusively for government purposes. The line might be
submerged at the mouths of the Thames, Humber, Med,
way, Severn, the Wash, &c.--Correspondent of Builder.

THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD, TUESDAY, DECEATBER 21, 1852.

CONSERVATIVES—S.
Anson, Viscount

Baring, T.
Barin, Hon. F.

G

Lildel, H. G.
Powell, Colonel

Smyth, J. G.

Stuart,