The Morning Post from London, Greater London, England • 3

THE MORNING POST, TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 1853. experienced by bankers and merchants to get a supply of silver coinage. The authorities at the Mint, however, were making every effort to increase the supply, and bad succeeded in increasing the weekly issue from 210,000. per week, two years ago, to 600,000. During the last three months there had been coined at the Mint 4,335,000.

in gold, and 92,000. in silver, and the total number of coins 00 USE OF COMMONS. Monday. The Speaker took the cbair at four o'clock. NEW MEMBER FOR LANCASTER.

1 took the oaths and his 6eat for Lancaster. Tt fdlUwing nills were read a third time, and passed Bdl; Irwell Valley Waterworks Bill Run-2 and Canal Bill Shipley Gas Bill Teignmouth ulrboar ai.J Teign Navigation Bill; Midland Railway Vmendn.tnt of Acts, Bill Scottish Central Railway irl, JaII mini: bills were read 8 second time, and ordered to 63,000,000., while the deficiency in actaal hard money jnrespect not only of mortgages, but settlements and their de-(for a portion of the debt was doubled, owing to the rate at ductions, I know not but I have taken that charge at one-which you borrowed) was, from 1806 to 1815, only 2,004,000. 1 fourth of the gross income assumed, that goes into the pockets, Such was the power of the income tax. In stating that the 1 not of persons beneficially interested not all proprietors-power of the income tax was such as to bring about this but of mortgagees, and those who are in the receipt of settle-result, it is but fair to state that out of 65,000,000., the meat incomes. Well, sir, if that be so, then it appears that the charge that I have mentioned, 9,250,000.

was due for the owners of lands and houses do not receive 67,200,000., but debt contracted before 1793 so that if you compare the 47,200,000. This 47,200,000. is not then, by'those actual expense of the Government with the whole expense who are beneficially interested, but you will 3ee that they of war from 1806 to 1815, with your revenue, when yon had who receive it pay a tax of 583,000. Deduct that from the an income tax, it stands plainly before you that you actually 2,330,000., and you'll find the result is that the net income raised 7,000,000. a-year, during the years from 1806 to from lands and houses which I have stated at 47,200,000.

1815, more than the charges of Government and debt, it appears that the net tax paid by that income, after deduct-(Hear, hear.) Now, I must say that is a most remarkable ing all that is paid to mortgagees the net tax paid by that fact. It affords to me a proof that if you do not destroy 47,200,000. is 1,750,000. Now, air, I believe, if you will the efficacy of this engine I do not raise the question scan how much in the pound is represented by this now whether it is to be temoorarv or whi.h I 1.750.000. vou will find that it comes as neurit wi he commit ted Banbridge, Dublin, Newry, and Belfast' Rdilwav Bill; Portsmouth Railway Bill; Amber- were possible for the Government to induce the assembly of Jamaica to amend the vicious constitution of that island, and to place it upon a foundation that would give scope for a strict control of their expenditure, her Majesty's Government would then be disposed to recommend to the house to employ the credit of this country in guaranteeing the repayment of the debt.

I do not now inquire whether that would entail a charge upon this country. I believe it would entail none. You would be the first to assert that there should be the utmost jealousy as to the interposition of the credit of this country between debtors and creditors out of the country. (Hear, hear.) But, considering all that has happened in the West Indies, considering the effect that British legislation has had in precipitating their difficulties, I do believe that if we were able to point out a prospect of great and effectual relief to Jamaica, to be indirectly obtained from an effectual reform of its Government, this house would look with a generous and considerate eye upon any proposition for the use of the credit of this country in the manner that I have mentioned. (Hear, hear.) Sir, that refers to Jamaica, whieh presents at the present moment by far the most urgent case of distress amongst the West Indian colonies.

(Hear, hear.) I am not sure that there is any other island among those colonies which would be in a condition to request a similar interposition. If there be, it would depend upon such colony to show their claim, but I do not think it likely that such a claim will be made. All I mean to say is, that the door would not be absolutely shut against it. (Cheers.) I pass on now, sir, from this collateral topic of the West India interest to another topic UUiU lu UB a ainerent matter, and which I will speak I upon oy-and-bye it you do not destroy its efficacy, it affords "uc anuuiu Hostilities unhappily break out again, of at once raising your army to 300,000, and your fleet to 100,000, with all your establishments in proportion. (Mur- murs.) And, much as may be said to me of the importance of maintaining an army reserve and a navy reserve, and of having our dockyards and arsenals well stored, I say this fiscal reserve is no less important-(hear, hear) for, if it be used aright, it is an engine to which you may resort to repel aggression, and with which, judiciously employed, if necessity should anse-which God avert-you may defy the world, (Loud cheers.) This, then, sir, is the purpose which the in- come tax has served at a time of vital struggle in enabling you to raise the income of the country above its expenditure of warand civil Government; and that service so performed, was performed at a time when men do not minutely inquire mto the incidents of taxation, or indulge themselves in the adjustment of its details, but are afraid lest they should lose the mass and the substance.

At a time when the hand of violence is let loose, and when whole plains are besmeared with carnage, it is desirable that you should have the power of resorting to this mighty organ to make it available for your defence and for the salvation of the country. (Cheers.) This income tax expired in 1816, but it was destined to revive. Sir Robert Peel called forth from repose this giant who had once shielded us in time of war, that he mignt aid us in our industrial pursuits in time of peace fiuouiu in huib ui peautj If the first income tax produced enduring and memorable results, yet I am very sorry to say that its expenditure was accompanied with painful scenes of havoc and bloodshed. (Hear, hear.) The second income tax has been an instrument by which yeu have introduced, and by which, I hope, you may ere long perfect, an effe ctive reform in your commercial and fiscal system. (Cheers.) And for one, am bold enough to hope and to expect that in reforming your own fiscal and commercial system, you have laid the foundation of a similar reform, of slow, perhaps, but of certain progress in every country in the civilised world.

(Loud cheers.) I say, therefore, sir, that if we rightly use the income tax, when we part with it, we may look back upon it with some satisfaction, and may console ourselves for the annoyances it may have entailed, by a recollection that it has been the means of achieving a great good, u.uv..j uucvi.es, auu uuiuiahciy iu uisuKiuu. (Cheers.) Well, now, sir, let me give to the committee a nt rkici mnrfx. l.ll immediately to ourselves, and ultimately to mankind. closer analysis of this matter. I shall assume that it is your view, as it is the view of the Government, that we cannot, at the present moment, with a due regard to the public interest, dispense with the income tax.

Let us lock a little into its composition, and attempt to investigate the charges which are alleged against it. Sir, I am not one of those who make light of those charges. In my own opinion, it is perfectly plain, from the mode in which the income tax was put an end to at the termination of the war, that it is not well adftnted fnr a nsrmanonf nf.llnn nf nnn Am.l unless you can, by reconstruction, remove its inequalities. Even if you could remove those inequalities, there would fill i ujem uujcwiviis ui mo uiguesb cuaracitT, wnicn 1 think, under any circumstances, would be found to open up questions of the most serious import to many, the reconstruction of the income tax, involving as it necessarily does to so large an extent the objectionable principle of self-assessment, which cannot be satisfactory. (Hear, hear.) ucvauac lum acu-osscssmcut leaua to gross irauus upon the revenue (hear) and to real inequalities in the tax, perhaps more trying than any of those ine- qualities it strikes at, but likewise because of a ten- dency to an arrangement essentially different in its na- ture and position.

But now let us examine into the compo- sition of this tax for, in fact, though we are in the hatit of speaking of the revenue derived from income as a tax, it is First, because that self-assessment leads to gross frauds much more nearly a code and system of taxation. In bulk. it is a volume elaborated by many successive years' experience it is a huge mass of precedents and in its construction it is as vast and complete a system as well could be. If you take the total amount, in round numbers, produced by this tax, you will find it is 5,600,000., the l-28th part of which is 2,400,000. If you investigate the composition of schedule A as to lands and houses, which I take together, because they are substantially analogous, lands and houses pay no less than 12-28tha of this 2,400,000.

Let us look at the other great element of the process that which proceeds from trade. In order to get at that with correctness we must descend a little deeper than the mere classification of schedule A. In schedule A some very considerable classes pay duty along with lands and houses mainly trading concerns. Takine schedule R. the occupation of lands and places that along with trades uwufmiuu ui iiuiu auu (jiaLcj mat uiuug Willi pay this tax, and what I may call the trades proper, the three branches pay no less than 1,800,000.

more, and 1,800,000. is 9-28ths of the whole tax. Well, now, sir, it is that inequality that gross inequality in the general construction of this tax that I object to. I stated that you ought not to lay the tax at so hieh a rate unon Drecarious as upon realised incomes. (Hear.) What incomes are pre- carious, and what are real (Hear.) The incomes derived from trades, I presume, we call those which are not real, but precarious Probably that is so I do not wish to anticipate the judgment of the committee, but probably that is so.

Observing that the question is between land and trade for tuai, auci an, ia tuc uuam 4ucstiuu yuu win uiiu mac, lana contributes 2,400,000., and trade 1.800.000.. or between that, after all, is the main question you will find that land I of about 1,300,000. or 1,400,000., in consequence of a decrease of charge for the Kaffir war. At that period the right hon. gentleman thought that the only charge against that surplus would be 100,000., which he proposed to apply to the light dues, and to other purposes connected with shipping.

I will now state to the house how that surplus of 1,600,000. which the right hon. gentleman anticipated has been swallowed up. There is an increase in the navy estimates as compared with 1852, of an increase in the army estimates and the commissariat of 90,000. and the increase in the commissariat, I may state, has been occasioned by this, that we have reached that stage in the hostilities at the Cape when we may consider that the necessity for extraordinary votes is at an end, and that the provision made by Parliament will henceforth be passed under the ordinary heads of expenditure.

(Hear, hear.) The committee will under- I swum, iuai, inougn we propose a retrospective vote ot 100,000. for the Kaffir war, that there is likewise a prospective vote of 70,000. for the ordinary expenses of the commissariat. There, therefore, is a double charge as far as the Cape of Good Hope is concerned. There is also an increase in the ordnance estimates of 616,000.

The militia estimate has not yet been reduced into the complete shape in which it would be laid on the table; but I am sorry to say that there is a very large and unavoidable increase upon the amount which was last year mentioned by my right hon. friend, then the Secretary for the Home Department, when he introduced the Militia Bill. The estimate for the present year on account of the militia cannot be much less than 530,000. (Hear, hear.) Doubt of this was expected by my right hon. friend, who stated that the probable amount would be about 300,000.

but the expense of giving effect to that plan, which, in all other respects, has realised every favourable anticipation that was formed of it, has been 230,000. more. The last item is the sum of 100,000. to be added to the vote for the purposes of public education and if the committee puts together these five sums, you will find that, although the right hon. gentleman (Mr.

Disraeli) anticipated a surplus of 1,600,000. fur the financial year 1853-4, that they amount to 1,654,000. But there has been some improvement in the revenue of the country, and there are likewise some few matters of general expenditure in which her Majesty's Government have been able to make some small savings. With respect to the important and unsatisfactory system of charge for the packet contract service, I must say that it has been our most anxious desire to see what could be done to amend that system. We think that the charge for that service is wholly disproportioned to any benefit which the public derives.

(Hear, hear.) I am not at present in a condition to lay the estimate on the table, nor to state exactly what its amount will be but I venture to anticipate that we may be able to show a saving of 75,000. But, at the same time, I ought to state that the whole subject is one of great uncertainty. The saving in Exchequer bills, owing to the diminution of interest, is expected to be about and there will be a sum which the bouse must observe is occasional in its nature a sum of 135,000. arising under the Crown revenues, which will be available under the provisions of the law under the bill passed having reference to metropolitan improvements, but which is charged to the amount of 27,000. These various sums will together give a sum amounting to about 300,000.

I now come to the estimated revenue and expenditure for the year 1853-4, under its several heads. The charge on the funded debt is 27,500,000., and the charge on the unfunded debt is 304,000., making together, and here I ought to mention to the committee that, for the sake of convenience, I give round numbers, without entering into fractions. The charges on the consolidated fund amount to 2,503,000. the navy estimates, not including the packet service, amount to the army estimates to the ordnance estimates to 3,053,000. the miscellaneous estimates to the commissariat to and the militia, as far as we can judge at present, to 530,000.

There is also an extraordinary vote for the Kaffir war of 200,000., and the estimate for the packet service may be fairly taken at' 800,000. These amounts will give a total estimated expenditure of 52,183,000. I now come to the anticipated revenue. Customs, excise, stamps, 6,700,000. taxes, income tax, post office, crown lands, miscellaneous sources, including, I think, a sum of 160,000., being the capital of the merchant seamen's fund, out of which we shall have to pay 80,000.

for pensions, and old stores, 460,000. To these I may venture to add another item, which is necessarily uncertain and a matter of conjecture a saving of 100,000. upon the operation which has been proposed to the house, with respect to the exchange and redemption of stock. It may be more, it may be less, and I hope, that in the result it will be found to be more. Adding up these various items, the committee will find that they give a total estimated income of 52,990,000.

against which we have to set a total expenditure of 52,183,000., showing an apparent surplus of 807,000. But as I am most anxious to avoid the raising of undue expectations, I am desirous to impress upon the committee that of this sum of 807,000. about 220,000. consists of various items which do not proceed from permanent and recurring sources; but of money due simply to the year. With respect to the packet service and harbours in the Channel Islands, I have not yet been able to settle with my right hon.

friend the First Lord of the Admiralty what reductions can be made in those estimates. It is very possible that the surplus may not be realised to the extent of 100,000. It will therefore be more safe to take it at 700,000. and from that sum you must take the sum of 220,000., which, as I said before, consists of occasional items, which will not be repeated. Still, my most sanguine hope is, that we may, on the whole, be able to realise a surplus of about 800,000.

This is the state of the account of the country, as I have endeavoured to bring it up to the present moment, and to present it clearly to the committee. (Hear, hear.) The committee will not have failed to observe, that in reckoning that estimated income, I have included a large sum, amounting to more than one-tenth of the whole revenue which we have been deriving since the year 1842 from the income tax. But the income tax has, at the present moment, legally expired, and it will be for the committee to consider whether they will revive it. On this subject I am afraid that it will be my duty to trouble you at some length, for there are various points to which, on this question, I must call your attention, occupying the position which I do with respect to the financial matters of the country. The first of these has reference to a particular plan.

As regards the shipping interest, we know from a statement already made by my right hon. friend the President of the Board of Trade, that her Majesty's Government propose to afford what they trust will be found to be considerable benefit and relief to that interest, without inflicting any additional charge upon the country. But there was another interest mentioned by my right hon. friend which had so much claim upon the general sympathies of the house, that respect and consideration demand that at least I should not leave it without mention. I mean that which is called the West India interest.

Sir, as regards that interest, I regret to say there is little, indeed, if anything, that can be done by the Government, consistently with its more extended duties to the public, in fulfilment of the requisition which that interest has preferred. With regard to the reduction of the duty on sugar, which is one of its requests, in proportion to the fall of the duty on foreign sugar, so as to maintain the differential rate that now exists upon it, it is entirely impossible for the Government to hold out the smallest hope of their recommending any such reduction. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the question of refining sugars in bond, which is a question of a different character, my bon. friend the Secretary to the Treasury will take a future occasion of entering more at large into that question bat I regret to say that we have not discovered any method of granting that privilege, in the present state of the law with respect to sugar, which would be satisfactory to the West Indians and the refining trade, and which, at the same time, would not inflict a very heavy loss upon the revenue. (Hear.) With respect to the equalisation of spirit duties, again I fear that really nothing remains to be done in this respect.

I believe the distillers of this country consider that, though the duties have been somewhat more than equalised, we are not prepared to propose any change in the law in the nature of equalisation of the spirit duties as between colonial and domestic interests. Sir, there is but one way in which it has appeared to the Government that they might entertain a sanguine hope of being able, at a very slight charge on this country, to make such a proposition as would confer a material benefit on the West Indians, and that in a way which, if it can be effected, will, I am sure, command the approbation of this committee because it would enable them to economise the heavy, and, in many cases, ruinous expenditure of their own Governments. (Hear, hear.) In the case of Jamaica, for example, there is a public debt, the minimum interest upon which is 6. per and the maximum 10., the capital of the debt amounting to about 500,000. (Hear, hear.) And, sir, if it aciuajiy issued witmn that period amounted to 6,100 000 I (Hear, hear.) The demand from the Bank of Ene- I a'ne' wi5n the 10 days' WBS a the rate of 100,000.

per diem, and it was impossible to turn out Bujargessum. witn regard to a greater issue of half-sovereigns, it was evident that as the number of coins would have to be doubled, the process of manufacture was comparatively slower. The Master of the Mint had, however, exerted himself night and day to meet the demands of the public, and would continue to do so. Mr. DISRAELI inquired whether the Government would have any objection to lay upon the table the reports of the Master of the Mint Mr-WILSN said there were no reports, but that if the right hon.

gentleman would move for any papers that would throw light on the subject the Government would produce them. A paper had already been moved for, showing the amount of coinage issued from the Mint during the first three months of the present year, which would be delivered to-morrow. Mr. DISRAELI said, that if there were no reports from the Master of the Mint, it would be unnecessary and impossible for him to move for them. (Laughter.) Mr.

DISRAELI inquired whether there was any proposition before the Government for the coinage of quarter-sovereigns Mr. WILSON said that the report had received the attention of the Government, and that they had directed a die to be cast for quarter-sovereigns, similar to the American gold dollar, in order to make an experiment. The great objection to the quarter-sovereign coinage was, that the delay in coining it would be quadrupled, as compared with the sovereign THE NEW ZEALAND COMPANY. Mr. BAILLIE wished to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he was prepared to proceed with the charges which he had made last session against the New Zealand Company, and if so, when he would bring the subject before the house Sir W.

MOLESWORTH was understood to say, in reply, that the charges which he had made were founded upon certain papers which he had moved for, and which had been laid before the house. There was not, he thought, any necessity for further inquiry. PRISONERS TN THE HOUSES OF CORRECTION. Mr. T.

CHAMBERS moved for a return of the number of persons, distinguishing males from females, now in custody in the Houses of Correction and other prisons in England and Wales specifying the proportion of such persons who have received their education respectively at prison schools, workhouse schools, mill or factory schools, and common, public, or private schools; and, where such persons have received their education at more than one of such classes of schools, specifying as far as practicable the total periods of their attendance at each of such classes of schools. Agreed to. PETITIONS. Mr. PIGOTT presented a petition from the medical practitioners of Reading and its vicinity, in favour of a modification of the income tax also, from the attorneys and solicitors, for repeal of the certificate duty.

Mr. GASKELL presented a petition from the attorneys and solicitors at Bradford, Yorkshire, for a repeal of the attorneys' certificate duty. Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from the Medical Association of Manchester, against the unequal assessment of the income tax. Mr.

J. KERSHAW presented a petition from 2,000 inhabitants of Stockport, for repeal of the tax upon paper, advertisements, and newspaper stamps and from the president, secretary, and officers of the Stockport Reform Association, for repeal of the tax upon paper, advertisements, and newspaper stamps. Mr. MORRIS presented a petition from the newspaper proprietors ofCamarthen, against the advertisement duty. Lord HOT HAM presented a petition from medical practitioners of Hull and Beverley, complaining of precarious incomes being taxed at the same rate as incomes arising from realised property.

Lord D. STUART presented a petition from members of the Metropolitan Association of Physicians and Surgeons, praying that the income tax, if reformed, may be adjusted on more equitable principles. Mr. BUTLER presented a petition, signed by the rector and 1,424 inhabitants of Whitechapel and adjacent parishes, praying that the duty on tea may be reduced to Is. per pound.

Mr. ELLIOT presented a petition from the owners of land in Cambridgeshire, praying for a repeal of the duty on malt and hops. Mr. EWART presented a petition against the duty levied upon foreign butter. Mr.

PETO presented a petition from Norwich in favour of a modification of the income tax. Mr. HUME presented a petition praying for the repeal of the attorneys' certificate duty. Mr. SMYTH presented a petition from the medical gentlemen in the city of York, praying that the incomes derived from precarious and permanent sources should not be as-csd equally tn the income tax.

Mr. L. KING presented a petition from the proprietor of the Surrey Gazette, praying for the repeal of the advertisement duty. Sir J. ANDERSON presented a petition from the nro- i vost, magistrates, and town council of Dunfermline, praying I for the repeal of the duties on paper and pasteboard, as in- jurious to the staple manufacture of the town, and a material i hindrance to the improvement of designs to be produced by the Jacquard loom.

Mr. BRAND presented a petition from the Lewes Me-chanics' Institution for the repeal of all taxes which impede the diffusion of knowledge; bIso a petition from the proprietor of the Sussex Advertiser for the repeal of the adver tisement duty, and for an alteration of the law relating to newspaper stamps. THE BUDGET. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER The annual exposition of the financial state and prospects of this country, upon ordinary occasions, affords abundant materials of interest both to the house and the country, and of anxiety to the person who is charged with preparing that exposition; but on the present occasion that interest, on the one hand, and certainly that anxiety, on the other hand, are greatly increased. A variety of circumstances have recently occurred which indicate the increased eagerness of the people with respect to financial questions.

Political events strokes which had imperilled or overthrown administrations, and which have made it necessary to adjourn from year to year questions of taxation had likewise greatly accumulated upon the present Government, and the task which they have to discharge in that respect, and in connection with those questions, has been rendered of the most difficult and interesting nature, descending to the first elementary principles of taxation and almost, I may say, to the first principles by which men were united together in civil society. With a task so formidable before me, I feel warranted in addressing a special appeal to the committee for its kindness and indul-1 gence for I am certain that only by that kindness and indulgence can I be enabled, I will not say adequately to discharge, because, that is beyond my power, but to discharge the task so as to make my statement intelligible to my hearers, (Hear, hear.) The first portion of my duty will be to lay before the committee the state of the revenue of the country and I think that I shall best discharge this duty by taking up the recital at the point at which it stood last year in the hands of the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli). It will be satisfactory to the committee to observe I that, as our experience grows with the lapse of time, there is still more abundant and larger proof of the elasticity of the revenue, and of the progress of the productive and consuming power in this country.

(Hear, hear.) On the 30th of April, 1852, the right hon. gentleman my predecessor estimated the revenue for the year at 51,625,000. and in December, 1852, when he had occasion to return to the subject, be estimated the revenue at 52,325,000., exhibiting an increase of about 700,000. And now, within the few months which have elapsed since December, we have further evidence of the same gratifying character; for the revenue, which was then estimated at 52,325,000., has amounted to no less than 53,089,000. (hear, hear) showing an increase on the amount anticipated at the commencement of the year.

The expenditure of the past year was I estimated, on the 30th of April, at 51,163,000., but the actual expenditure only amounted to 50,782,000., leaving a surplus of 2,460,000. (Hear, hear, hear.) I must, however, entreat hon. gentlemen to make large deductions from their sanguine expectations, and not to suppose that there is this surplus of 2,460,000. for the reduction of taxa-; tion. Unfortunately, before we arrive at that conclusion, there is one circumstance which it is rather material to con-, sider, and that is, what is the estimated amount of the ex-; penditure of the year which we have just com menced 1 When I look to that expenditure, and compare it as estimated as it stands on the votes of the house with the expenditure of last year, I find that it is as follows: The expenditure of 1852-3 was 50,782,000., and the expenditure of 1853-4 the greater part of which has already been voted, aad with respect to which I cannot anticipate any deduction is estimated at 52,183,000.

Without going into other particulars, which, I am sorry to say, have occasioned a further deduction from the surplus of 240,000., I beg leave to point out to the committee that no less than 1,400,000. three-fifths of the whole have already been disposed of by the charges to which the country is liable under Acts of Parliament, by the votes to which you have agreed for the defence of the country, and by charges for miscellaneous services; which, I apprehend, the house will not be inclined either to refuse or review. The right hon. gentleman, in December, 1852, estimated as follows his supplies for the present year He took thetota sum at 1,600,000., and he ventured to anticipate a surplus nnd Rnsatnn and jv' So. 1 Bill Arobergate, Nottingham, and Boston and grern Jun.tion Railway (Sale, (No.

2) Bill; Ayr-Jhire anrf Galloway (Smitbstown and Dalmellington) Rail-' flill; Crieff Juuction Railway Bill. EASTERN UNION RAILWAY. On the motion that this bill be read a second time, Lord A PAGET called upon members, as they valued togix nut-- boI to support this bill. (Laughter.) After sliowing koi ii' his opinion, the provisions of the scheme w0uld bt, if arri; out, inconsistent with public safety, the noble lor.l concluded by moving as an amendment that the bill be second time that day six months. Mr.

BALI, seconded the amendment. yit. CA VLEV said this was the case of a strong company jeiinst wealS one. He hoped, notwithstanding a very amongst members for the last five days, that the house would tillow the bill to be reaii a second time. jlr.

CAKDWELL did not think it consistent with his jotf, considering the position he filled, to advocate one side or the otht but was in favour of full inquiry, so that the merits ordeectl of the scheme might be ascertained. (Hear, Mr. WAMDIXGTON, in reference to the remarks of the hon. Bo'mbrr (Mr. Cayley), that it was a case of the jtrone againa tue weak, observed that the giant (the 8-t i Counties Company) was continually challenged by liis puny adversary, and because the giant would not met: iiim, the little one was constantly abusing and seeking to pull down the giant.

(Laughter.) the boo. membi having entered into a' long refutation of certain erroneous statements circulated by the prsmoters of the bill ij il prejudice of the Eastm Counties Company, and rrion c.ally in reference to the arbitration between the two Onopaoi concluded, amid loud cries of Divide" jnd other indication, rjf impatience, by calling on the house to reject th- bill. Aftera words fron. COBBOLD and Mr. BALL, Mr.

SOTilERON suggti 1 that the amendment should re withdrawn, and the bill refer. 1 to a select committee. This suggestion was accepted ti.o bill was read a second and ordered to be referred to f. iJect committee. A number of other private bills were read a second time.

TAUNTON ELECTION. Sir G. GliEV, as chairman of the Taunton election committer, i.niugbt up the report of that committee, which was effect, iui Arthur Mills, had not been duly elected fur that borough that the said Arthur Mills, had been guilty, through his agents, of bribery but that it was proved, to tr-e sati-faction of the committee, that such bribery had been comiitted without the concurrence of Mr. Mills; that the last election of Taunton, so far Mr. Mills was concerned, war void election that SirT.

E. Colebrooke had been, through antnts, guilty of bribery; but that it was not proved thai such bribery had been committed with the consent ol Sir T. E. Colebrooke. NEW ROSS ELECTION.

Mr. HEADLAM, as chairman of the New Ross election committee, brought up the report of that committee, which was to ti flii-t that Charles Gavan Duffy, had been duly electee the borough of New Ross (hear, hear) and that tin ciminittee had given the costs against the petitioner, or a related to the allegations of iutimidation. Hear. hear.) THE BALLOT. Mr.

H. BERKELEY gave notice that, on the 10th of May, In- would submit to the house his annual motion to subsiitun the Fallot as the mode of taking the votes at elections ijy Great Britain and Ireland. (Cheers.) THE CITY AND METROPOLITAN POLICE. Sir UE EVANS asked the noble lord the member for tue City vi jn whether, in the commission of inquiry regarding UK-rate of the corporation of London, there will beany etion to direct an investigation into the working of the Eafj police acting under the corporation, with a view without derogating from the present excellent administra-iim of that force) to a consideration of the advantages of consolidate the whole of the metropolitan police under one management uiso, whether that commission is to be appointed b) A of Parliament so as to enable it to pursue, wah adequate power, its inquiries? and whether there be (ft; ion to to its duties a like inquiry into the corporation of the a.ijoining city of Westminster Lord J. RUSSELL replied that a report had already been made by commissioners with regard to the police of the City of Laudun.

but that it would be desirable to cause additional to be made. With regard to the second question of the lion, a el galhmt gentleman, he had to state that the City of London had expressed its willingness to give any aid to the commission that might be required and, in consequence, (be Govirnment thought it would be unnecessary to appoint the coinn.ission by Act of Parliament. With respect to the iait question, the Government did not contemplate issuing any commifsion on the subject. THE CROWN OF DENMARK. Lord D.

STUART asked the noble lord the member for tae City uf London, whether a protest has been received by the Government of this country from the Prince of Schles fig-Hoist. ir asain-t the treaty of the 8th day of May, 1852, regulating the succession to the crown of Denmark and if so, whet tier there will be any objection to lay that document on lie tnble of the house Lord J. RUSSELL said that the protest to which the noble lord referred had been received by the Government Ml that be was not prepared at that moment to give any fuller answer to the question. THE ORDNANCE SURVEY IN THE ISLE OF WIGHT. Col.

HAKCOURT observed that a geological survey was now being made in the Isle of Wight, and that the broad arrow had been affixed to a church, and to several private buildings, without the consent of the churchwardens or owners. He wished, therefore, to ask whether the persons eagaged by the Government on the survey were authorised to put the broad arrow on those buildings? Mr. MONSELL replied that, by the 4th and 5th -ip. 30, it was lawful for auy persons under the authority of the Mast G. neral of the Board of Ordnance, after giving otice in writing, to affix the broad arrow, or any other mark, to auy building they might think it necessary to select 'or that purpose.

THE FATE OF MR. BOYD. Mr. M. MILNES asked the Secretary of the Admiralty whether, in consequence of any instructions issued to Sir erard Home, of her Majesty's ship Calliope, with a view to ascertain the fate of Mr.

Benjamin Boyd, that officer has transmitted any report on the subject to the Admiralty, in with his recent cruise amongst the South Sea islands, irom which he is understood to have returned to Sydney on the 19th of December last also, whether any report ha? been received from the officer in command of the aina station on the same subject Mr. OSBORNE replied that the Calliope left Sydney on tte 22d July, but that no report had been received as to the success of her mission. The Serpent had also been ordered to leave Hong Kong on the 9th of October, and to proceed to the islands, but no report had been received from her. Hr- had also to state that the surveying vessel of Captain Dennian was also instructed to call at the islands and endeavour to ascertain the fate of Mr. Boyd.

THE LAWS OF SETTLEMENT, REMOVAL, AND RELIEF. Mr. A. WISE asked Lord J. Russell whether it is the in-wintion of her Majesty's Government to introduce, either in this or the next session of Parliament, any measures to abolish or revise the laws relating to the settlement and re-niotal of the poor, or to alter the present mode of raising iae rates tor the relief of the poor, by distributing the charge oer fx wni.

and variable basis, or otherwise Secondly, if her Majesty's Government are not prepared to propose riy legislation on these subjects, whether Lord J. Russell "ill assent to the appointment of a committee to inquire into fiie practical operation of the laws for the relief of the poor in England and Wales, and to consider the policy and general effect of all the law6 relating to settlement, removal, and parochial assessment Lord J. RUSSELL replied that the subjects to which the i ou. member referred were of great importance, but that the Government did not think there was sufficient time to discuss the laws of settlement and removal in the present session ol Parliament. At the same time, he begged to state tliat a measure had been prepared for the most comprehensive and complete revision of the laws of settlement and removal, and that it would be produced in the next session.

With regard to the second question of the hon. gentleman, had to say that the inquiry by Mr. Buller's committee us a very con.plete and searching one, and that the Government did not think it desirable to appoint any other committee on the subject. THE EDUCATION BILL. Mr.

PETO asked the member for the City of London if the intention of the Government to proceed with the econd reading of the Education Bill, pending the inquiry Jo proceeoing in a committee specially appointed by the house to inquire into the subject, on the introduction of the Manchester and Salford Education Bill Lord J. RUSSELL said it was not the intention of the government to proceed with the second reading of the Edu-Son Bill until after Whitsuntide. By that time he hoped toe select committee on the Manchester and Salford Educa-Bon Bill would have brought its labours to a conclusion. WASTE LANDS IN DENBIGHSHIRE. Mr.

WHALLEY asked the Secretary of the Treasury Uther there is any, and what, objection to give consent on fafi part of her Majesty (who is the lady of the manor) to toe inclosure of the wastelands of the parish of Ruabon, -n the county ot Denbigh, the proceedings in such inclosure naving been orr.mentvd upwards of two years since, and been delayed by the refusal hitherto to give a definite whether such consent would be given or not? Mr. WILSON replied that the reason why the Government had not advised her Majesty to give her consent to the inclosure referred to was that they were in communication with certain persons interested in the property, and that the negotiations were still in progress. SCARCITY OF SMALL COINS. Mr. DIVETT inquired whether the Government had aay means to prevent the great inconvenience to the public resulting from the scarcity of small silver coinage and half overeigns 6 Mr.

Wi LSON said that the inconvenience to which the bon. gentleman had referred was very great, and that were daily made to the Treasury as to the difliculty not of but of 9d. in the pound. (Hear hear.) Well, then, I want to know where is the prima facie case for breaking up the income tax upon the ground of its inequality upon two classes of payers of income tax the owners of land and those engaged in trade? Do you think, upon the whole, if a difference were to be made between land and trade, it ought to be greater than that (Hear, hear.) I myself do not raise the question, for it is not necessary. I pass that by but I pointed out, according to a rational estimate, that land pays 9d.

and trade 7d. in the pound; and I ask any moderate man whether, if the difference were to be made, he would wish that difference to go farther? (Hear.) I think the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) stated last December that the revenue from precarious incomes was and from realised incomes, 7d. (Hear.) If anybody will compare that reduction, he will find that cal- culation already made for him, and that the 7d.

paid by the land corresponds as nearly as possible with the 5Jd. paid by precarious incomes. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, it is a most grave consideration if we are to break up in pieces this tax, we must do it for some object. That object is to relieve trade at the expense of land and houses. It is well that those who are about to give their sanction to that proposal shonld be aware where the war of classes is to begin, and where it is to end.

(Hear, hear.) According to the views expressed thereon by many, and among others by the right hon. gentleman opposite, the member for Wilt- mo i ilil nun. geiiLieuittu uppusue, I Lie memuer ior wns- shire, in the committee, the true statement will be that land should pay about while Drecarious incomes shall nav 3d and I have now shown you by figures that at the present moment land does pay while precarious incomes pay 3d. Sir, I protest against the doctrines of those who say, not that we must do justice between one class and another, but we must average classes among themselves. (Hear, hear.) This is a very common doctrine, but it is not that of the hon.

member for Montrose (Mr. Hume), who is always consistent and manful, and when he sees a difficulty, he takes no pains to get out of it. (Laughter.) Now, I ask those to look at what those whs have this talk of equality in their mouths mean what they mean by this averaging of classes. Look at the annuity tables, and compare a life at 25 years' purchase, but go up to the age of 70 or 75, and the value of the life will be five years or six to uc yuu cau average me value oi rnose Classes together till you make them meet by the same standard. But roko .1 I years, and tell me if you can average the value of those classes what possible average can those interests admit of what con solation is it to a man whose interest is for five years, when he is called upon to pay twice as much as the one at 25 It ia still more absurd when you come to average trades.

There are many trades worth 25 years' purchase and trades are better on the whole than many other sources of income, and for this reason, because trade affords opportunities for making provision for friends and relatives which no other pursuit presents. (Hear.) I say, on the other hand, thereare mul titudes of other trades which are not worth five, four, or even three years purchase, and how are you to average the interest three years with that of 25 years, which is eight times as I "Jj piuucat agniuji ems averaging ui Classes There is another, but a very painful part of this subject. It is said that the land pays 7d. in the pound, according to a standard, not dependent upon the will of the owner. I cannot doubt that, in a majority of instances, the returns of traders are very honourably made.

There are a great many -J-J ku is uiuai. uuueuiL to euicuiaie vviiat 816 the proper returns, but I fully believe that duty in many cases is solved by the honourable trader against himself, aQt that he will at times fix his profits, even if any- thing, somewhat higher. I would therefore say, do not It be supposed that I attribute to the trading classes generally those dishonest practices in their returns which sometimes happen. I shall name no name; I shall violate cases in trade in which it is most difficult to calculate what no confidence; but I am going to mention a case where in a great town a new street had to be built. The parties displaced by the new street were charged in taxes to a certain amount they also made returns to a certain amount and when the new street came to be built compensation must be had for the new buildings, and that compensation was to be assessed by a jury.

Without wearying the committee with details, I will give the amount of compensation which 28 persons claimed, the amount which was awarded by the jury, and which might be taken as an approximation to the real value but were I to descend to individual cases, it would be impossible to do 3o without producing an impression partly painful and partly ludicrous. (Hear, hear.) I will give the house the amount of compensation which was claimed before the jury by these 28 parties. They claimed 48,159. as the measure of their profits for a single year. The amount of compensation awarded to them by the jury wf pwwt wiuucuOTiiuu anaiucu to laciu uy tue jury was 26,973.

a little more than half what they claimed, at wnat was the amount at which they had returned their profits for assessment to the income tax The returns of their profits for assessment to the income tax which they separately made amounted to only 9,100. (Laughter.) I deeply regret that the great body of honourable men. who bave made the name of British commerce famous throughout the earth, more even for its truthfulness than for its enerzv. should be degraded by association with persons who can perpetrate frauds like these. (Hear.) But, at the same time, frauds of this kind, in many other cases, and to a minor extent, do exist.

They are inseparable from the nature of the im- r-wv imiii" icuiaimug aa ib 13 auu 11 la impoasioie, WQen you are called upon to consider theouestion of them. salaries, the case seems to be argued rather highly both ways. At present there is a movement among the civil servants of the Crown for a change with regard to the superannuation fund, which would amount to an increase of the salaries. Times have changed, for the committee will recollect that not long since the right hon. member for Oxfordshire (Mr.

Henley) made a motion in this house, which waa almost carried, in which he proposed to reduce all these salaries by 10 per cent. If the right hon. gentleman thinks that they ought to be reduced by 10 per it is better to reduce them by a little less rather than break up the income tax upon this ground. But it would be better to deal with public salaries by a separate arrangement rather than to make them the occasion of attempting to perform an operation which all the responsible persons who have hitherto attempted it have declared to be impossible and absurd. Now, I C0BW to that which is supposed to be the sore place of the income tax, schedule and I will appeal to the love of justice of the committee, after they have heard what I have to say AlmiA- ia MthaF a uuom iW scneuule even if it stood wuy taey snould not break un the uicome tax.

This is a bold challenge, but I will endeavour I to meet it. I do not intend to push earnestl on tlwcom I mittee the high consideration of nublic Iredit but it enters into the question, and I will show vou how But, in the first place, I will read a testimony that has come fro across the Atlantic, in order to impress ou the committee the, to the payment- that connected with the Exchequer Loan Fund. After all that passed in the month of December last, it was evidently the duty of her Majesty's Government to make a full investigation into that fund. Sir, we have instituted that investigation. We have presented the results in print to the house, through a form so simple that an inspection, occupying only a few minutes, will exhibit tbem to any hon.

member. It appears from the figures there presented that after debiting the Exchequer Loan Fund with, I won't say every folly of Parliament, but with every questionable and every ambiguous grant that it has made after charging the whole of this to the last farthing, while such has been the sound discretion exercised by the members and officers of that board in the loans that have been made, they have afforded an immense amount of local accommodation, and have likewise realised, after paying every expense that belongs to the office of the establishment, a net balance of not less than 227,000., which, if we put the value which certain sanguine men would put on certain investments, raises the balance to nearly 1,000,000. to the credit of the entire transactions in favour of the national exchequer. (Hear, hear.) Well, sir, under these circumstances, the sentiments expressed by my right hon. friend, the First Lord of the Admiralty, in December last, with regard to the Exchequer Loan Funds are justified by the facts (hear, hear) and it is not our intention to propose an abolition of that system, which we think has been both honourable to those who have administered highly beneficial to the country.

(Cheers.) Sir, I now approach the most difficult part of the task that I have to perform. I now come to the question of the income tax. (Hear, hear.) The first question that the committee has to consider is, whether or not we should make efforts to part with the income tax at once. I do not say that such an alternative is impossible. On the contrary, I believe that, by a conjunction of three measures, one of which must be a tax upon land, and houses, and other visible property, of perhaps 6d.

in the pound another, a system of licenses upon trades, made universal (cheers) and averaging something like 71. and the third, a change in your scheme of legacy duties (cheers) it would be possible for you at once to part with the income tax. (Hear, hear.) But, sir, her Majesty's Government do not recommend such a course to the committee. They do not recommend it because they believe, in the first place, that such a system would, upon the whole, be far more unequal, and cause greater dissatisfaction, than the income tax. (Hear, hear.) Tbey believe likewise that it would arrest other beneficial reforms of taxation (hear, hear) and they believe that it would raise that difficult question with regard to the taxation of the public funds of this country, in a form the most inconvenient.

Sir, I won't dilate upon this subject, for it is needless to do so. I leave it to those, if such there be, who are prepared to recommend an immediate abandonment of the income tax. Such is not the recommendation of her Majesty's Government. Now, sir, with regard to the income tax, I wish that I could possess the committee with the impression that constant study has made upon my mind of the deep and vital importance of the subject. We are too apt to measure the importance of the subject by the simple fact that we draw from this source 5,500,000.

of revenue. Sir, that sum is a large one, but the mention of it conveys no idea to the committee of the immense moment and magnitude of the question. If you want to appreciate the income tax, you must go back to the time of its birth. You must consider what it has done for you in times of national peril and emergency. (Loud cheers.) You must consider what, if you do not destroy it and I will explain afterwards what I mean by destroying it what it may do for you if it should please God that those times should return.

Sir, it was in the crisis of revolutionary war, when Mr. Pitt found the resources of taxation were failing under him, that bis mind fell back upon the conception of an income lax and when he proposed it to Parliament, that great man, possessed with his great idea, raised his eloquence to an unusual height and power. There is a description of the speech made by Mr. Pitt on that occasion written by a foreigner a well-known writer Malet du Pan, which I may venture to read to the committee. I believe, after the lapse of 55 years, it will not be heard without interest.

This is an account, in that periodical which was edited by Malet du Pan, of the speech of Mr. Pitt, which was delivered by him on the 15th December, 1798 From the time (he said) that deliberative assemblies have existed' I doubt whether any man ever heard a display of this nature equally astonishing for its extent, its precision, and the talents of its author. It is not a speech spoken by a Minister, it is a complete course ef political economy a work, and one of the finest works, on practical and theoretical finance that ever distinguished at once the philosopher and the statesman." We may add to this statement the learned researches of such men as Adam Smith, Arthur Young, and Stuart, whom the Minister honoured with quotation. Sir, I do not know whether this committee are aware how much the country owes to the former income tax but because I feel it to be of vital importance that you should fully appreciate the power of this colossal engine of finance, I will venture to place before you, in what I think will be an intelligible and striking form, the results which at once appear. I will draw a comparison between the mode in which your burdens were met during that period of war when you had no income tax, during that period of war when you had an income tax in a state of half deficiency, and during that last and most arduous period of war when the income tax was in its full power.

From 1793 to 1798, a period of six years, there was no income tax from 1799 to 1802, there was an income tax but the provisions of the law were far less effective than they are now. From 1806 to 1815, a period of 11 years, you had an income tax in its force. Now, sir, every one in the house is aware of the enormous weight, and the enormous mischief, that has been entailed upon this country by the accumulation of our debt but is not too much to say that if there had been a resolution to submit to an income tax at an earlier period, it is demonstrated by figures that that debt need not at this moment be existing. (Hear, hear.) This inference, you must admit, is a fair one. I put together the whole charge of government and war, together with the charge of so much of the national debt as had accrued before 1793, so as to make, if I may so express myself, a fair start fro 1793.

Well, sir, the charge of government and war, together with the charge of the debt incurred before 1793, amounted, on an average of six years, to 1798, to 36,000,000. a-year. The revenue of that period, with all the additional taxes, amounted to 20,600,000. There was, therefore, an annual excess of charge above revenue including the charge for government and war, and the debt contracted before 1793, together with the debt incurred since 1793 of no less than 15,400,000. In 1798 you got a partial income tax, and mark the change which immediately began.

During the four years from 1799 to 1802, the charges on the same items which I have mentioned, which had been 36,000,000., rose to 47,000,000. Bat the revenue had also risen to 33,700,000., and the excess was diminished for these four years by about 2,000,000., and the excess, instead of being 15,400,000., was only 13,600,000. But now, look to the operation of the tax from 1806 to 1815, during the time when your exertions were the greatest and your charge the heaviest the average annual excess of war and government, together with the charge upon so much of the debt as had been contracted before 1793, was 65,794,000. But you had your income tax in its full force, and the revenue of the country now amounted them three-fourths of the entire; therefore, the plain adjustment of the income tax, totally to dismiss them from justice of the present result between land and trade yur calculation. But, sir, I leave that part of the question must go a great part of the way towards the solution with the proposition, which will hardly be controverted, that of that difficult question, whether the tax, in the main, 39 regards the state of the case between land and trade, re-is a just tax? Let us look at the case as it stands between serving these cases for separate consideration, there is no land and trade.

The income from land and houses actually sufficient ground to attempt the reconstruction of the in-paying the tax, if the committee will follow me, I will state come tax. I have got three other cases still to consider, as briefly as I can. You know something of the rate that First, I will take the case of schedule E. Schedule con-trade pays, to which I shall advert by-and-bye, bat I will tains the payments derived from the incomes of salaried now confine myself to land and houses. Land pays in the servants of the Crown.

With the exception of those em-gross uniformly 7d. in the pound upon income not assessed ployed in the Bank of England, there is, I think, no class of by the possessors, but by an independent standard. It is ob- Pep9n3 included in this schedule who may not be called ia order to estimate what land and houses really pay, 80me sense public servants. There are also some cases of we must deduct the difference between gross and net income. lcal authorities, such as that of the East India Company It is quite obvious you mast do more, for the owners are ut more generally they are all servants of the Govern-not the only persons beneficially interested.

There are, ment. With respect to the cases of these salaries, and of besides, a large body of mortgagees and life renters who, public salaries, I would point out to the committee that though they pay 7d. in the pound, yet bear no proportion to il is scarcely possible to distinguish between this class of in-the difference between gross and net income and every C0Hes and life incomes because, in the first place, as they member of the committee is as capable of making the calcu- are usually held almost for life, with retirements in prestation as I am. About 80,000,000. is the income of lands Pect their durability is little inferior to that of life incomes, and houses; the gross income paying taxes is a little ad their inferiority in respect of durability is, upon the more, but I take the round numbers at 80,000,000., whle, compensated by this, that they are usually progres-which produces 2,330,000., and what would be the I 3ive incomes, while life incomes are generally stationary.

I deductions if you break up the income tax schedule by not think it is possible for any dispassionate man to draw schedule In Scotland the case is peculiar but you must a distinction between the cases of salaried incomes and of life allow the public burdens which have not that force but in incomes. With regard to salaries and remissions upon. ocotiana ine nrst great item is a large charge for repairs (hear) repairs for building, repairs in making drains and ditches, and the charge for repairs upon houses is still larger. (Hear, hear.) You must allow for insurance (bear) you must allow for charges, without which it is impossible to conduct business, and without which you would have no income realised. You must allow I will not say the net bat you must allow as much for the cost of management as would be allowed to a merchant in schedule D.

You must allow the cost of offices, the cost of stationery, and other expenses of that sort. You must allow the expense connected with the arrears of rent, which cannot be separated from, but is incident to, property. You must allow abatements of rent, which forms a real deduction. How much shall you allow under these separate heads of redaction I take it at 16 per which, for those repairs and law charges and other necessary expenses, I think is not unfair. (Hear.) I am quite certain that in many instances it is very low (hear, hear) my object is to oe within bounds.

Well, then, if 16 per cent, be a fair average, inn mnof tola osran tmm tY.a Qft AAA UAA7 now charged at 7d. in the poun the sum of 12,800,000., which is fully expended before the income reaches the pockets of the owners. I say, therefore, we arrive at this point, that you have got 67,200,000. instead of 80,000,000., which you had before. Whether that is a fair estimate to make of the total amount upon the lands and houses sllover the kingdom,.