The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-03-08 00:00:00

JUDICIAL Lgcasi-vroßs.

Lord lioniAm moved for leave to brisg in a
bill to iisqualify certain ittlicial officers from sitting
and voting in the House of Commons. H pro-
posed to extend the existing exclusion to the Master
of the galls, the Judges_of the Prerogative Courts- of
Englaild and Ireland. and the, Jadge of the Admiralty
Court it Ireland.—Lord PALIMASTON did not oppose the
introduction of the bill, and leave was given.

I:II,VpTIT DEITIES

IluarE moved a string of resolutions, based upon
certain returns, that, while agricultural produce, cattle,
&c., are admitted to , entry duty free, to compete with
similar productions. of the -United Kingdcur,,it is impo-
litic and unjust to continue duties of import on articles of
foreign manufacture of the same kind with those menu.
featured at home ; and. the house will take,into conside-
ration the duties that are strictly protective on articles of
:capon, both of manufactures and agricultural produce,
with the view of speedily repealing the same. lie con-
tended that if we are to have Free-trade, in justice to the
agriculturists,, who were unequally taxed, Free-trade
ought to be fully carried out.—Mr. MITCHELL seconded
the motion, and strongly recommended the abolition of
ad valoreta,duties.—Colonel SIBTE:cIRPE, as an old bird,
was not to be caught by the chaff of Mr, Hume's speech,
and would not trust him with his vote.—The CHAN-
CELLOR, of- the EXCHEQUER objected decidedly to the
motion,con the ground that the house ought not to part
with any. portion of the standing revenue until it knew what
was the expenditure of the country. He did not dissent
from Mr. HUME'S facts and principles, and agreed in the
spirit of the resolutions. He thought it would be a great
advantage to get rid of nominal duties, and he con-
curred with Mr. Mitchell in, thinking ad valorem,
duties objectionable.--After some further discussion,
Mt. Draw ELI said, the cultivation of the soil had been
subjected to an undue weight of taxation, and the late
government had considered,the whole system of our taxa-
tion, with the view of affording a remedy for what they
conceived to be an injustice. They arrived at the. con-
clusion that the best remedy was by consulting the in-
terests of the consumer,, and proposed certain measures
which the house did not think proper to sanction. It
was not true, he said, that these measures were offered as
a new commercial system ; they were described as only
the first step, and others were intimated. The late
government had shown the sincerity of their views by
relinquishing power,, and he had abstained from harassing
the present government by financial discussions ; but on
this occasion he was called upon to give an opinion on a
question affecting the interests of agriculture. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer had found this fault with the
motion—that that practical assembly required perfor-
mance, not promise. But the resolution held out to the
country a policy, and the question was whether it was a
sound policy, and whether it was politic to hold
out to the country the promise of it. let Mr. Gladstone
had denounced the motion as merely a promise, and
made a speech which was only one long promise. The
house was, then, to consider the resolution only as a
question of policy, and as he approved of the policy and
believed that it did justice to the agriculturists, he
should vote for the motion.—Mr. CARDWELL defended
the course taken by the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
whose argument was, " Do not commit yourselves by
condemning any portion of the revenue until the time
comes when you can give effect to your condemnation."
Upon a division, the motion was negatived by 161 to
103. _ _