Commons Sitting of 2 June 1854

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1° Common Law Procedure; Bills of Exchange (No. 2); Police; Literary and Scientific Institutions; Parochial Schoolmasters (Scotland); Landlord and Tenant (Ireland); Leasing Powers (Ireland).
2° Jurors and Juries (Ireland).
Reported—Public Revenue and Consolidated Fund Charges.
3° Excise Duties.

THE IONIAN ISLANDS—NEUTRALITY— QUESTION.
MR. HUMEasked whether ships sailing under the Ionian flag would be considered neutral in the eyes of England and France?
LORD JOHN RUSSELLsaid, the question with regard to the Ionian Islands arose at Constantinople on an application made to the Consul of Her Majesty at that port that vessels sailing under the Ionian flag should he allowed to trade with Russia. The Consul thought fit to refuse his sanction, and applied to Her Majesty's Ambassador at Constantinople. Lord Stratford de Redcliffe sent the question home; and the Secretaries of State for the Foreign Department and for the Colonial Department were of opinion that vessels sailing under the Ionian flag could not be considered neutral, and that it was impossible to allow them to carry on trade with the ports of Russia. The case was referred to the law officers of the Crown of this country, and they, having had under their consideration the treaty of Paris, were of opinion that the Ionian Republic, being under the protection of Her Majesty, could not be considered as a neutral State, and that the Ionian Republic must take part with Great Britain with respect to the war in which she was engaged, though not bound to carry on active measures of warfare. Such had been the result of the opinion given by the law officers of the Crown; and, therefore, vessels sailing under the Ionian flag were not to be considered as sailing under a neutral flag.

THE WAR WITH RUSSIA.—OPERATIONS IN THE BALTIC—QUESTION.
MR. HUMEwished to call the attention of the First Lord of the Admiralty to the reports that were in circulation from the fleet in the Baltic, and asked whether he was prepared to state to the House the nature of any despatches which he had received from the Baltic?
SIR JAMES GRAHAM: The Admiralty received to day a despatch from Sir Charles Napier, dated the 23rd of Mar, off Hango, where he was at anchor, with eight sail of the line and some smaller vessels, in the Bay of Hango. at the entrance of the Gulf of Finland. He sends an account of an exploit, which, though not on a large scale, is yet a very gallant feat of arms performed by one of Her Majesty's frigates and a small steamer. It appears that on the 21st of May they heard of three large Russian merchantmen in an inlet about ten miles inland, and placed under the fire of a fortress of very considerable strength. A steam frigate the Arrogant, commanded by Captain Yelverton, and a small steamer, the Hecla, under the cominand of an officer very wellknown to the House and the country—I mean Captain Hall, formerly better known as Captain Nemesis for his distinguished conduct in China; these vessels proceeded up the inlet, which is very narrow, and the latter part of it under the fire of musketry from a considerable military force on shore. Captain Hall cut out, under the fire of the battery, and within 400 yards of it, the only one of the three merchantmen that was afloat, and brought it off, having triumphantly executed the duty on which he was despatched. Sir Charles Napier observes, that this is an exploit worthy of the British arms in the best times of our naval history. And what must he particularly satisfactory to the House is, that, notwithstanding the doubts that were entertained whit regard to the manning of the British Navy. Captain Hall received his appointment only three months ago, and the Hecla was one of the last ships commissioned. He manned the ship in a very short time, and with a very considerable proportion of what might be called landsmen. If I had been called on to mention the ship in Her Majesty's service that was least perfectly manned, I should have named the Hecla; yet such is the character of British seamen, that the execution of this daring exploit has been performed in a most brilliantand successful manner. Sir Charles Napier adds, that on the following day, in an attack on two forts, the conduct of two others of Her Majesty's ships was very distinguished; and the whole state of the fleet was reported by Sir Charles Napier as most satisfactory. The French fleet had nut joined. It was expected to join in five or six days from the 23rd; and by,
1236
this time I have no doubt the French and English fleet combined are in the Gulf of Finland, forming twenty-eight sail-of-the- line, with frigates and other vessels in proportion.

CUSTOMS DUTIES (SUGAR) BILL.
Order for Committee read; Instruction to the Committee, that they have power to make provision in the Bill pursuant to the 4th Resolution of the Committee of Ways and Means, which was reported and agreed to on the 29th day of May last.
House in Committee.
On Clause 1 (Duties on Sugar and Molasses to be levied after the 5th day of July, 1854),
MR. MOFFATTmoved, as an Amendment, "that foreign refined sugar be admitted on the 5th day of July at 16 s. per cwt., as provided by Act of Parliament. The difficulties as to the application of this measure were felt to press very unjustly on those principally interested in the question, and he hoped that Government would not urge the Bill, as it at present stood, upon the acceptance of the House. The modifications which had been introduced into the Bill were, no doubt, intended to affect foreign refined sugar, and to act as a protection to home refiners; but they would not, in his opinion, answer any such purpose. At first it was proposed to exclude foreign refined sugar until the 16th August, as a protection to the refiners; but they new proposed a differential duty of 1s. 4d. per cwt., which was so small that it would not prevent a single hogs-head coming in. He therefore proposed that the distinction should be expunged: it would not make a difference of 5,000 l. to the revenge.
MR. J. WILSONcould not understand for what purpose the hon. Member persevered in his Amendment after the question of compromise had been fairly and virtually agreed on out of doors, both by importers and refiners. He could not see what induced the hon. Member so needlessly to interfere on the subject, and he hoped that the Committee would not entertain the Amendment, which, if carried, would, notwithstanding the statement of the hon. Gentleman, make a considerable difference to the revenue.
MR. HORSFALLdid not speak on the question die other evening, because he was desirous to ascertain the feeling of those interested before he expressed an opinion upon it, He had since had an

1237
opportunity of seeing some of the leading refiners and dealers in the matter, and he was happy to say that they had expressed themselves perfectly satisfied with the proposition of the Government. He should therefore oppose the Amendment.
MR. BLACKETThad received a communication from some of his constituents to the effect that they were very much dissatisfied with the Government proposition. He should therefore support the Amendment.
MR. ARCHIBALD HASTIEsaid, he believed that the mode of proceeding suggested by Government would give universal satisfaction.
MR. MOFFATTsaid, that the interests he represented had no desire to avoid a fair share of a war tax, but they did object to be unreasonably or unfairly taxed. The hon. Member the Secretary to the Treasury was mistaken in supposing that the Government proposition gave general satisfaction. He knew that in the City of London it hod given very great dissatisfaction. He would, however, if it were the feeling of the House, withdraw his Amendment.
MR. J. L. RICARDO,on the contrary, hoped the hon. Gentleman would press it to a division. He could see no reason why, because we were involved in a war, it was imperative or necessary to alter the relative duties between raw and refined sugar, which were definitively settled during the Government of the late Sir Robert Peel. The mode of proceeding proposed by the Government was, in fact nothing less than giving protection to foreign refiners in contradistinction to and against British refiners. Such alterations as those proposed might just as well have been made seven or eight years ago as at the present time, and, inasmuch as they were quite unnecessary, he must say that he looked upon them as merely going back to the system of taxation and protective ditties upon manufactured articles.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCEQUERsaid, he was very much disposed to agree with the hon. Gentleman who had last spoken, that there was something, of the character of protection in what the Government proposed to effect by the measure they were now disputing; but, at the same time, he thought that that protection was diametrically the reverse of what it was represented to be by the hon. Gentleman. The question really was, whether we should give protection to British interests
1238
against foreign invasion, and not whether we were giving protection to foreign refiners in contradistinction to and against British refiners. The Dutch refiner paid a duty on raw sugar just as well as the English refiner, but he got that back on the refined, in the shape of a drawback, when exported to this country; and, in fact, it was a very great question, into which he would not pretend to enter, whether he did not get back something more than he had paid on the raw sugar, so as to have an absolute bounty on the transaction. The real question was, whether they would protect the Dutch refiner at the cost of the British, by calling on the British to pay a tax which the Dutch did not pay. The question was, whether for four weeks the moderate allowance of 1s. 4d per cwt. should continue as a duty on refined sugar imported from abroad, over and above the duty apparently paid. The question might be looked at in two lights. It might either be contended that the arrangement proposed by the Government was unjust in principle, or it might be admitted that it was just in principle, but that, not having been embodied in the Act of 1848, the law ought to remain as it was settled at that time, and the question ought not to be reopened. The hon. Member (Mr. Ricardo) seemed to consider that the arrangement was not just in principle; but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought it so plain as hardly to require argument. that the British refiner who had to fill his refinery with raw sugar, upon which he had paid duty at a certain rate, was entitled to expect that when he brought his refined sugar into the market he should compete only with foreign refined sugar which had paid a duty proportioned to the duty which his own raw sugar had paid. He admitted that this matter ought to have been settled in the year 1848; but at that time Parliament had great and complicated questions in hand—questions in which much larger interests were involved—and it was really no matter of surprise that, amid the pressure of public business, a question of this kind should for the moment have escaped attention. But then, if it had escaped attention in the year 1848—and if an error of adjustment had been then committed, which bore rather hardly on the British refiner—it surely could not be contended that Parliament had forfeited its right, or, under all the circumstances of the case, was released from the obligations of doing the refiner justice by

1239
rectifying its own mistake, and mitigating the pressure upon him. The Government had felt it to be its duty to endeavour to make some arrangement, in order to meet the case; and, having to consult various interests and various claims—the claims of the British producer of raw sugar, of the refiner of sugar from abroad, and the refiner of sugar at home—he did not think that a fairer arrangement could have been made than that which his hon. Friend (Mr. Wilson) now proposed. Although they might not have succeeded in satisfying everybody, yet the testimony which had been borne by the hon. Member for Liverpool (Mr. Horsfall)—whose constituents were more interested in the question than any other class—was a proof that they had succeeded to a very considerable extent.
MR. HUDSONwould support the proposition of the Government as a fair compromise, and hoped the hon. Member would not divide the House.
MR. MUNTZsaid, that though the arrangement might be satisfactory to the refiners, there was great dissatisfaction with the Government proposal among large consumers of sugar, from whom he had received-representations on the subject, and if the Amendment were pressed to a division he should certainly support it.
Amendment withdrawn.
On the proposition that the duty on yellow muscovado be 12 s. per cwt.,
MR. MILNER GIBSONwished to ask on what principle the difference had been made in relation to the duties on raw and refined sugars—whether any new saccharometer had been invented, or the Secretary of the Treasury had discovered that nobody had known until now the relative proportions of saccharine matter which raw and refined sugar contained? Unless this change had been made upon some scientific principle, they were certainly giving an improper protection to the refiner by raising the duty upon refined sugar more than the duty upon raw. Unless some explanation were given he must agree with the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Ricardo) that the Government had made a retrograde step.
MR. J. WILSONsaid, the change had certainly been made upon scientific principles, for it had been made in accordance with the rules of arithmetic. If the right hon. Gentleman would make a rule of three sum of it, he would find that the proposed duties of 12 s. and 16 s. on raw
1240
and refined sugars bore the same proportion to each other as did the old duties of 10 s. and 13 s. 4d. The same relation subsisted between 12 s. and 16 s. as between 10 s. and 13 s. 4d.—that was, the smaller amount in each case was exactly three-fourths of the larger; so that, in fact, no alteration whatever had been made in the proportion.
MR. MOFFATTsaid, the answer of his hon. Friend was based on the assumption that the sugars which the refiner would use would pay a duty of 12 s. per cwt., whereas there could be no doubt—and He had the authority of men of great experience in the sugar trade for the statement—that the sugar which would go exclusively to the refineries would be that which would be admitted under the new scale at 11 s. per cwt., so that the bon. Gentleman's rule of three sum was not quite so clear as he made out. The practical effect of this Bill would be to put the whole system of the duties on sugar on a sliding scale, and it was to the great uncertainty which must result from this that the sugar importers mainly objected. He should therefore move the omission of the new differential duty on muscovado sugar.
MR. J. L. RICARDOalso expressed himself dissatisfied with the hon. Gentleman's answer. At present the differential duty in favour of the refined sugar was 3s. 4d. per cwt.; under the proposed arrangement it would be 5s.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, the question at present before the Committee was the propriety of proposing a duty of 12 s. per cwt. upon "yellow muscovado and brown clayed sugar, or sugar rendered by any process equal in quality to yellow muscovado or brown clayed, and not equal to white clayed, according to a standard to be furnished by the Treasury." Did hon. Gentlemen object to that proposition? ["No, no!"] Then, if that proposition were not objected to, he fell back at once upon his hon. Friend's rule of three sum. It was exceedingly inconvenient to be discussing two questions at once; and the proper time to deal with the 11 s. duty would be when they came to it.
MR. MOFFATTsaid, that "yellow muscovado" sugar was of an entirely new description in our market, and he would move, as an Amendment, that the words "yellow muscovado" be omitted from the clause. As regarded colonial sugar, he believed

1241
that great inconvenience would be experienced from the passing of this clause. He objected to the proposed mode of determining the amount of the duty by a standard to be furnished by the Treasury, and of charging "yellow muscovado" 12 s., and "brown muscovado" 11 s. per cwt. The tests proposed, he understood, were granulation, colour, and quantity of saccharine matter. But he defied his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, together with his hon. Friend the Secretary of the Treasury, with all their knowledge of sugar, to distinguish by these tests between any two. The tests were of the most fallacious kind. At present the system was in operation with respect to about 20,000 tons of the sugar annually imported; but, although so limited in its application, it led to great inconvenience, uncertainty, and delay, and to frequent appeals to the Treasury. If it were now extended to the remaining 380,000 tons, these evils would, of course, be very greatly increased. The importers did not care whether the duty was 11 s. per cwt. or 12 s., but they objected very much to the mode in which the duty was to be charged. The distinction proposed to be made would involve a sacrifice of revenue, which was wholly unnecessary, to the amount of 150,000 l. a year, and it would be giving a premium of 1l.. per ton to the producer of bad sugar.
Amendment proposed, page 1, line 19, to leave out the words "Yellow Muscovado and Brown Clayed Sugar, or Sugar rendered by any process equal in quality to Yellow."
MR. J. WILSONdefended the clause. If they charged the same duty upon sugar which would yield but 40 lbs. or 50 lbs. of refined sugar to the cwt. as they did upon sugar which would yield 90 lbs., it was obvious that the pressure of the tax would be most unequal. A very strong feeling had arisen in favour of refining in bond, and he was not prepared to say that, if refining in bond could have been permitted without involving extensive restrictions and impositions on trade, it would not have been by far the best mode of levying the duties. But, as this could not be done, it was only right to make a difference in the amount of duty, and the arrangement now proposed was, in fact, only an extension of the principle which was already in operation with respect to refined sugars, and which was acted upon also in assessing the duties upon spirits imported
1242
into this country above proof and under proof. Government proposed to allow very low sugars to come in at a lower rate of duty than at present, and no objection had been made to the proposal by the trade. On the contrary, the numerous deputations which he had received upon the subject considered the new arrangement nothing but a fair and equitable adjustment of the duties. No doubt there must be difficulties in establishing a standard, and it would be much better for the Custom-House officers if the sugars which were brought over were of uniform quality, so that the duty could be uniformly charged; but as that was not the case, there was no reason why an attempt should not be made to levy the duties as equally as possible. The difficulty of levying the duty had been exaggerated. At first there was a difficulty, but the Custom-House officers and the trade had now learnt to understand each other better. He wished that some arrangement could be come to, to which no objection could be attached, but as that was an impossibility, the present arrangement was offered as the best solution of the difficulty. The principle was not new; it was only extending, for the first time, to muscovado sugars, the produce of our own colonies, the precise principle which in 1848 was applied to brown clayed sugars. He believed that those who were best acquainted with the subject, and who were most deeply interested in it in the colonies, admitted that the proposal was as fair a compromise and as proper a solution of the question as could be made.
MR. GREGSONdid not assent to the statement of the hon. Member for Ashburton (Mr. Moffatt) that the importers did not care what the amount of duty was. For his own part, be hoped that a considerable quantity would come in at the 1l s. duty. Although the consumption of sugar had increased in ten years from 200,000 to 400,000 tons, the total amount of duty was the same upon the larger as it had been upon the smaller quantity. And with respect to price, what had formerly cost 23,000,000 l. now cost 14,000,000 l., consequently there was a saving to the public in the reduction of the price and the duty of 8,000,000 l. or 9,000,000 l. a year. They had, therefore, every reason to be satisfied with the position in which they stood; and he thought the proposed increase, from 10 s. to 12 s. per cwt., under present circumstances, very moderate.
MR. THOMSON HANKEYsaid, the

1243
importers of sugar from the West Indies were not indifferent as to whether they should pay 11 s. or 12 s. per cwt. As a matter of compromise, the West India body, to get over the difficulty, were ready to try the measure as some approximation to the state of things they desired, in the hope that, if it should lead to inconveniences, the question should again come under the consideration of the House.
MR. J. L. RICARDOcould not separate the two questions of the 11 s. duty and the 12 s. duty; and the Amendment proposed aimed at the assimilation of the two. The opposition was not directed to the classification of sugar, but that a new class had been introduced. It would be impossible for any Custom House officer to distinguish between the different classes to the extent proposed; and the vexation and annoyance which had already been experienced in this respect ought to be a warning to the Government not to introduce new elements of discussion between the importer and the Custom House officer. It had been said that the 12 s. duty was now under consideration, and that the 11 s. duty and the 12 s. duty ought not to be mixed up in the discussion. Now, he objected to the differential duty between 11 s. and 16 s., which was a larger differential duty than that which existed under the old scale; and he did not think the hon. Gentleman justified in taking the yellow muscovado sugar as his datum line in calculating the differential duty. The differential duty had always been calculated hitherto as between the worst and the best descriptions of sugar, and he thought it was unfair to take an intermediate description and tell the importers that the differential duty was to be between that class and the refined sugar. A fourth class of sugars should not be introduced. but the old classification should be continued; and if this was a war tax, and it was wished to raise a revenue, let the 16 s. duty be taken as the point on which to go, or have a lower charge, but let the difference between the worst and best sugars be the same as heretofore.
SIR W. CLAYunderstood the intention of the Government to be this—that the standard of sugar which was to pay the 12 s. duty should be identically the same as that which now paid the 10 s. duty. If that were so, the relation between the 12 s. and 16 s. duties would be the same as between the present duties of 10 s. and 13 s. 4d. The Government seemed to him justified
1244
in maintaining, the distinction between 12 s. and 16 s., while the colonial interest were gratified with the new distinction that had been taken.
MR. MILNER GIBSON: The hon. Baronet seemed to him to depend upon a supposed assurance of the Secretary of the Treasury, which had not been given. He doubted, indeed, whether the hon. Gentleman either could or ought to give these assurances. If there was one thing more important than another, it was this—that the trade should be dealt with impartially, and that one person should not pay a higher duty than another on nearly the same description of sugar, in consequence of the matter being left too much to the discretion of Custom-House officers. It was not desirable to introduce new classes so slightly distinguished from others that the officers in different ports would differ on the subject of the quality. The distinction ought to be sufficiently broad to prevent injustice being done. Sir Robert Peel fixed three classes, and it was now proposed to break in upon that important principle.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER,said, it appeared that two objections were taken to the plan of the Government. One of them was the difficulty with respect to the enforcement of the lower classification by the Custom-House officers, inasmuch as it rested almost on their discretion. The other was the objection to classification upon principle. The right hon. Gentleman said it was difficult to distinguish classes of sugar, and objected to any discretion being placed in the haunts of the officers—[Mr. M. GIBSON: Too much discretion.] Then it was only a question of degree. What, then, was the simplest mode of dealing with a question which was so full of difficulties, and which was, in fact, only a choice of difficulties? What was the inequality proposed to he got rid of? An inequality which charged at the same rate two samples of sugar not precisely the same, one of them yielding 45lbs. of refined out of 112lbs. of raw, and the other yielding 80 lbs. The question was not whether the Custom-House officer might be a trifle wrong, and err about 6d. or 1s. per cwt., but whether a system should be adopted which would charge the same duty upon two articles, one of which was double the value of the other. They were now dealing with a commodity which entered this country as a raw material, and which had to undergo an important manufacturing process before it

1245
could get into consumption; and the question affected not only the home consumption, but the export trade, which was conducted under a drawback. If it were admitted that the refiner ought to pay upon the raw material a duty proportionate to the amount of refined sugar yielded by the raw material, and that he ought to receive such a drawback as would enable him to meet a rival in a third market, then the Government ought to see whether there was any insuperable difficulty in a proper classification. Now, what were the difficulties of classification? No doubt, formerly these difficulties were very serious, and now they were not inconsiderable. As to the "discretion" of the Custom-House officer, the word might be used in two different senses—judgment and caprice. They must trust to his judgment, but not to his caprice. His duty was to verify the conformity of certain sugars to a certain standard given to him. These were difficulties that must he encountered; but they were as nothing compared to the enormous inequality and injustice that would be done by refusing to admit classification. The hon. Member for Stoke-upon-Trent (Mr. Ricardo) had said that the Government were now introducing a new principle, and departing from that laid down by Sir Robert Peel, and by the Act of 1848. Now, that was a mistake, for the Act of 1848 established exactly this classification. But then the Committee were told that the difference between 11 s. and 16 s. was too much, and was unfair. But let the hon. Member turn to the Act of 1848, and examine the duties that were levied upon refined sugar imported from abroad, as compared with foreign sugar imported raw. By the Act of 1848, it would be found that muscovado, or any other sugar not equal in quality to brown clayed sugar, was liable to pay a duty of 12 s, whilst the refined article was liable to pay 17 s. 4d. This principle had been in operation ever since sugar had been introduced into the market upon a large scale, and was a greater difference, both positively and relatively, than was now sought to be established. It was true that that applied to foreign sugar only, and not to British sugars, and that this kind of classification had never been applied to British sugars, but that was the very grievance with which the Government and Parliament had had to deal every year since the passing of the Act of 1848. The refiner had not felt the grievance, because there was a protective
1246
duty in favour of the British sugar producer, and when he purchased British sugar of low quality the difference was made up to him by a deduction from the protection enjoyed under the law; but when the differential duty was disposed of, the fund was disposed of out of which that difference was adjusted; and, in dealing with the Act of 1854, they must be prepared to deal with the case of British sugars, either by classification or by refining in bond. By adopting the latter course, it would be necessary to apply a system of excise to a great article of British manufacture; whereas, by the system now proposed, the great refining trade would be set free from every restraint—a trade in which Great Britain was as well qualified to take the lead, and keep the lead over every other nation, as in any branch of trade. He submitted that the proposal of the Government was the best way of encountering those difficulties which could not be altogether overcome.
MR. J. L. RICARDOsaid, the right ben. Gentleman had stated the difference between two samples of sugar as varying from 45 lbs. to 80 lbs. Now, when the right hon. Gentleman alluded to the 80 lbs., he must be verging hard upon the white clayed sugar. The right hon. Gentleman had taken two extremes, between which there were from twenty-five to thirty different grades to be left to the discretion of the Custom-House officers. The right hon. Gentleman had nut answered his objection that the Government were now establishing a larger differential duty than before. The Government were about to propose an additional protective duty of 1s., which, he maintained, was a retrograde step in the legislation of this country.
Question put. "That the words 'Yellow Muscovado' stand part of the clause."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 69; Noes 12: Majority 57.
On the Question being put, that the clause, as amended. stand part of the Bill,
MR. HUMErose, to recommend that those who were employed to decide on the quality of these sugars should be persons of god education, that they should have some chemical knowledge, for the fact was, much must be left to their discretion, and men should, therefore, be selected who were qualified to discriminate between the different classes. As this could not be dune with mathematical accuracy. there must be irregularities which it was desirable to restrict as much as possible.
MR. GOULBURNurged the same consideration. Persons with chemical knowledge were appointed in the higher departments of the Excise, but they were still more necessary in the Custom House.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 2.
MR. J. WILSONstated, in reply to a question from Mr. MOFFATT, that as soon as this Bill was passed, standard samples of sugar would be put into the possession of the officers of the Customs, and the trade would be allowed every facility for inspecting them.
MR. THOMSON HANKEYsaid, it was not enough for the trade to know the standard sample, but it was also desirable that they should understand the mode in which the Customs officers compared the various sugars with the standards. Hitherto, different modes had been adopted at different ports, which was not of so much consequence under the old arrangements; but now that more stringent rules were to be adopted, it came to be matter of great importance that the same duties should be levied on the same samples in every port in England, and therefore it would be necessary that there should be one description of samples at the various ports.
MR. J. WILSONexplained, that some misapprehension had gone abroad, as if colour alone were to decide the duty without regard to the qualities of the sugar. That was not the intention of the Government, and he had introduced some words into the clause to make it clear that the duties were to be levied according to the general qualities of the sugars.
Clause agreed to, as were the remaining clauses.
New clauses brought up. Clause being read, abolishing the practice of refining in bond,
MR. MOFFATTwanted to know why that system of refining in bond was to be abolished? It was done with scarcely any expense to the Government, and he believed it was the desire of many persons in the trade to carry it on.
MR. J. WILSONsaid, it was the unanimous desire of all whom he had met that this system should be abolished. It was adopted at a time when foreign sugars were not allowed to be entered for home consumption; but these restrictions were now at an end, and it was desirable that all refining should be on one uniform system.
MR. HUMEexpressed his great satisfaction with the arrangement of the Go-
1248
vernment. He hoped to see the day when every restriction on trade—stamps, Excise, and all—would be removed. He thought Government deserved great credit for this arrangement.
Clauses agreed to; House resumed; Bill reported; as amended, to be considered on Thursday next.

EXCISE DUTIES BILL.
Order for Third Reading read; Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the Third Time."
MR. J. O'CONNELLsaid, he had given notice of a Motion respecting certain drawbacks which had been incorrectly set down on the paper, and he was therefore obliged to bring forward the matter in another way. He now asked for the postponement of the Order of the Day for the third reading of this Bill until after the Whitsuntide recess. By adopting that course, the House would be doing an act of great justice to a large and important class of Irish distillers. The subject would have been brought forward at an earlier period, had it not been thought that the drawback of which the Irish distillers complained would not be persevered in by the Government, and they now asked for a postponement of the third reading of the Bill in order to enable them to make such representations as would induce the Government to reconsider their determination. The objection of the Irish distillers was to the increased drawback allowed to Scotch malt distillers; but he must add that they not only objected to the increase of that drawback, but to the existence of any drawback at all. He considered that the system of drawbacks was inconsistent with the principles of free trade; they had been abandoned with regard to the soap duty, although it was true the duty had also been taken off, but, he believed, had it been continued, the drawback would have been given up. In consequence of the existence of the drawback on soap, the manufacturers in England had been enabled to undersell those in Ireland. It certainly seemed a strange principle to adopt, first to make a man pay money, and then hand it back to him, and, in his opinion, the more simple and rational course would be, to take that only which they meant to keep. The system had been condemned by the House before, a Committee which sat in 1831 having declared that the allowance of a drawback on malt spirits afforded facilities for fraud. On that occasion it

1249
had been reduced to 8d. per gallon on Scotch, and taken altogether from Irish whisky. He had no doubt it could be done away with altogether without injury to the revenue, and it ought to be discontinued, as it was a grievance which was much felt in Ireland, where, in consequence of its existence, the Scotch distillers were enabled to sell malt whisky at a cheaper rate. He therefore hoped that the Government would consent to postpone further proceeding with the Bill, in order to allow the Irish distillers an opportunity of representing their case to the Secretary to the Treasury. He begged to move, as an Amendment, that the order of the Day for the third reading of the Bill be post. pored to that day fortnight.
MR. BEAMISHseconded the Amendment.
Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the question to add the words "upon this day fortnight."
MR. J. WILSONsaid, he hoped the hon. Member for Clonmel would not press his Amendment. The propositions contained in this Bill had been before the House and the country since the 8th of May. The increased duties were at present being collected under a mere Resolution of the House; and, although that was a practice which had been recognised by the custom of Parliament and by the constitution of the country for many years, it was one which ought not to be pursued for a day longer than was absolutely necessary. He did not think it could be maintained that the House and the country had not had full notice of the nature of the Bill; and, although he had seen a great number of distillers and persons whose interests would be affected by the measure, it was only now, at the very last moment, be found that the slightest objection continued to he entertained to the Bill. He had only last week seen a deputation from persons interested in the malt trade between Ireland and Scotland, and he made arrangements which he had reason to believe were perfectly satisfactory to the Irish maltsters. If any ground were shown for supposing that the Bill would operate unjustly, either with regard to the Irish or Scotch distillers, he would readily postpone for the present its further progress, at whatever inconvenience. The Scotch distillers received a drawback of 8d. per gallon upon the exportation of malt spirits to England or to Ireland; but the very same privilege
1250
was given to the Irish distillers, who received a drawback of 8d. per gallon upon Irish malt spirits exported to Scotland or to England. The question really lay between the malt and the grain distillers as, however, the grain distillers in Scotland had finally acquiesced in this drawback being allowed on malt spirits, he thought the grain distillers of Ireland should also acquiesce. The distillers of the two countries therefore stood upon the same footing, with this exception, in favour of the Irish distillers—that the Scotch distillers had to pay freight upon the spirits they sent into Ireland—a charge from which the Irish distillers were, of course, exempt, He thought, under the circumstances, that it was unreasonable to ask for the postponement of so important a Bill.
COLONEL DUNNE: I think that there would he something in the objection of the hon. Secretary to the Treasury if the proposed drawback had been included in the original Resolutions, but that is not the case. The Bill, as the hon. Gentleman correctly stated, has been some time before the public and the Irish distillers, and they did not at first make any objections. Upon its first reading I stated that I did not object to it, because I had received no instructions to that effect from the distillers of Ireland; but the proposed drawback for Scotland has subsequently been increased, and therefore I think that my hon. Friend is perfectly right in objecting to the measure even in its present stage. The hon. Gentleman says that this is a question between the grain distiller and the malt distiller. He is perfectly right, but I do not see why the Government is entitled to support the malt distillers against the grain distillers. Let each distiller consult the taste of the consumer and take his own chance of success in obtaining a sale. The only reason that can be imagined why the Government should favour the one kind of distillation more than the other would be if they collected revenue only from one; but they collected revenue from both. This proposition is in fact giving to Scotland about 2,000,000 l. a year, because it is perfectly clear that the exportation from Ireland to Scotland is very small compared with that which takes place from Scotland into Ireland, because the trade of Scotland is favoured; and I do not think it right that the Government should favour any one particular kind of spirits, whether it is made from malt or

1251
from grain. I do think, as I said when I last bad the honour of addressing the` House, that you are pressing duties upon Ireland much too severely. I think that spirits are a very fair and proper subject for taxation, but you may even press that taxation so far as to lose more than you gain, and this I think you will do in Ireland. The Secretary to the Treasury and I had a little difference of opinion the other evening upon some returns which have been laid upon the table—as to the amount and diminution of the quantity of spirits consumed in Ireland—and lie quoted from returns to which I had no access at the time. According to all the returns to which we have access he was totally and entirely wrong; and I can show him from his own returns of last year, that while in England, where there was no additional duty laid on the consumption of spirits, it had increased, it had decreased both in Scotland and Ireland to the amount of something over 700,000 gallons. I have moved for returns upon this subject for the last two or three years, and I am perfectly certain that when they shall be laid upon the table they will bear me out. I was not aware, when I last spoke, nor could the Secretary to the Treasury inform me, why it was that there had been—which he asserted to have occurred—an increase in the consumption of Irish spirits within the last quarter ending in April while in the former quarters of other years there was a decrease: but I have since learned the cause. However secretly the intentions of the Ministry are kept with respect to the laying on of taxes, they were in this instance suspected in Ireland, and there have been large sales of spirits during the last quarter in anticipation of the very step which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has taken, and of this duty being raised. That is the reason why the increase in the last quarter has occurred. I do not think that it has taken place to the extent which the right hon. Gentleman imagines; but, whatever the extent, that is the reason of it. The distillers in Ireland, in fact, anticipated what the Chancellor of the Exchequer was going to do, and sales to a very large amount occurred in the last quarter for that very reason. I believe there can be no doubt of that; and I think I could produce proofs of it if necessary. Taking the year, however, in opposition to the quarter, it will be found from the returns, to which every Member has access, that both in Ireland
1252
and in Scotland the consumption has decreased, because you laid on a heavy duty, whilst in England it has increased, because you put on no additional duty. I think for the reason that these new drawbacks have not been before the country and the public, and cannot therefore have been considered by them, that my hon. Friend the Member for Clonmel is quite right in the proposition which he has submitted to the House.
MR. VINCENT SCULLYconsidered it was a most moderate and modest request that the third reading of the Bill should be postponed for one fortnight, in order to afford time for the case of the Irish distillers to receive its due consideration. He made no doubt his hon. Friend the Member for Clonmel, would not object to limit Ids request to even one week, which short respite could not occasion any delay whatever to the ultimate passing of the measure, the House being about to adjourn for the Whitsun recess. He could not conceive that any Government would refuse to accede to so reasonable a demand on the part of the Irish Members. The hon. Gentleman the Secretary of the Treasury (Mr. Wilson) had just mentioned that he had recently seen many distillers in reference to the present Bill, but did not go on to say that amongst them there was a single distiller from Ireland. He concluded that those private conferences were held exclusively with Scotch distillers, who were sometimes suspected to possess peculiar facilities for obtaining early information from official departments, and had evidently in this instance stolen a march upon their less vigilant brethren in Ireland. The Secretary of the Treasury had stated that the Excise resolutions were proposed in the House upon the 8th of May, about three weeks since; but it should be remembered that alterations were afterwards made, that several days had passed by before the Bill itself was introduced, and that an additional interval necessarily elapsed before its provisions could be accurately known in the most distant portion of the United Kingdom. The same hon. Gentleman had also asserted that the drawback upon malt was allowed in Ireland as well as in Scotland, and that, therefore, Irish distillers had no just ground for complaint of being placed under any disadvantage in regard to the sale of their own home-made spirits. He did not himself profess to be very full of the subject, but he was in a position to state emphatically that the malt drawback was abolished in

1253
Ireland many years since. He had also been informed that the grossest frauds were resorted to in Scotland for the purpose of obtaining the malt drawback there, by substituting unmalted for malted corn, by disposing to ale-brewers and others of the malt for which brawback had been allowed, and by various other improper means, which had been repeatedly proved before Committees of the House. The unfair contrivances connected with this drawback had enabled the Scotch distillers to undersell the Irish distillers in both markets. The practical result was that, in the year 1852, nearly 1,000,000 gallons of Scotch spirits had been imported into Ireland, whilst during the same period the Irish spirits imported into Scotland were under 16,000 gallons. A very serious injury was thus inflicted upon the Irish grain-growers, and it was therefore not a mere distillers' question. This malt drawback might also be fairly opposed upon the still broader ground that the drawback of 8d. per gallon had occasioned an annual loss to the Imperial revenue of nearly 160,000 l., which sum was given for the special advantage of those who consumed the superior article, and who could best afford to pay a higher price. The proposed drawback of 12½d. per gallon would augment the present temptations to fraud, and would increase the loss of public revenue up to about 250,000 l. sterling, which the country could in afford to sacrifice in these war times. That sum was in effect a bonus or bounty paid by the State in order to bolster up small whisky-makers in the Scotch Highlands for the benefit of landlords there, but to the manifest injury of Irish distillers and farmers. This was neither free trade nor fair trade. He trusted that the hon. Gentleman, on the part of the Government, would not feel ashamed to be guilty of a little fair play towards Ireland, and would now gracefully concede to its representatives a very slight courtesy, which could not retard the passing of his measure, but would afford some short time to inquire into its justice or injustice, and to clear up the serious differences expressed that evening upon important matters of opinion as well as of fact.
MR. DUNCANsaid, that the reason why the Scotch spirit trade with Ireland was greater than the reverse trade was, that the Scotch whisky being made from malt was better than the Irish, which was made from grain.
MR. VANCEwas persuaded that, so long as the system of drawbacks was continued, frauds must be perpetrated; and he attributed to these frauds the circumstance that Scotch distillers were able to manfacture whisky at a lower rate than they could do as fair traders, and send it into the Irish market to compete with Irish manufactured spirit. The city he represented (Dublin) contained many of the most extensive distillers in Ireland, who wished only to be placed upon a fair b footing. with their neighbours in Scotland.
MR. CRAUFURDprotested against the imputations cast by the hon. Gentleman upon the Scotch distillers as altogether unfounded. He contended that the reason why so small a proportion of Irish whisky was imported into Scotland was because the Irish spirit was almost entirely distilled from raw grain, while the taste of the Scotch people was generally in favour of whisky distilled from malt. He did not think any reason had been shown for postponing the third reading of the Bill. He denied that, on the part of the Scotch distillers, there was any fraud committed which could injure the Irish distillers.
MR. COGANsupported the postponement of the measure until after the holidays, in consequence of the discrepancy between the statement made by the Secretary for the Treasury and the representation contained in the petition he presented to the House on the previous day, with regard to the existence of a drawback on Irish spirits—the hon. Gentleman stating that a drawback did exist in Ireland, whilst the petitioners asserted the contrary to be the case.
Question put, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."
The House divided:—Ayes 61; Noes 32: Majority 29.
Question again proposed, "That the Bill be now read the Third Time."
MR. BEAMISHtrusted that, notwithstanding the division which had just taken place, the Government would not press the third reading of this Bill at that moment, but would agree to postpone it until the re-assembling of the House after Whitsuntide. It was very important that the Irish distillers should have an opportunity of stating their case. He moved the adjournment of the debate, and if the Government did not accede to the short delay asked for, he should feel it his duty to go to a division.
MR. HUMEsaid, he could not under-

1255
stand what was the object of the required delay. Did it appear that at the end of a week any new fact would be brought forward? ["Yes."] He certainly should have answered the question in the negative. If there had been anything requiring the Irish distillers to put themselves in communication with the Government they might have done so long since. The Scotch had found time to do so. He was as ready as any Irish Member to do justice to Ireland, but he thought there was no sufficient reason given for postponing the third reading of this Bill.
MR. FRENCHthought that as the Scotch distillers had been allowed to state their case to the Treasury, the Irish ought to have a like opportunity.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERwas very sorry that it was quite impossible to accede to the delay which had been asked. The Bill under consideration was a Bill which did not arise upon any general regulation or adjustment of the trade in spirits, such as last year occupied the attention of the House: it was a Bill of first-rate political and financial importance, having for its object to supply no less than 3,000,000 l. of taxation for the purpose of carrying on a great and necessary war. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. O'Connell) who made a Motion at an earlier part of the evening, had taken an opportunity—as he was perfectly justified in doing—of raising upon the Bill the question of a grievance upon the part of Ireland. The hon. Gentleman said that the present system of drawback, as regarded Scotch and Irish spirits, was a grievance affecting the Irish distillers. The hon. Member was perfectly justified in availing himself of a discussion on a revenue Bill, in order to state a grievance; and he had done so. But his hon. Friend near him (Mr. Wilson) had expressed, on the part of Government an opinion that there was no grievance at all—and in that view it had pleased the House to assent. But the hon. Gentleman had said that the Irish distillers had no opportunity of being heard. To that averment he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) begged most respectfully to demur. Since the 8th of May, they had as good an opportunity of being heard as the Scotch distillers—nay, he would go further, and say they had been heard. ["No, no!"] Why, he had himself received one deputation at least, if not more, of Irish distillers, during the last Session of Parliament. [An hon. MEMBER: That was another Bill.] The
1256
case was the same now as then; and the position of the Irish distillers was not made worse by the present Bill. They were heard last year on the question, and they had had an opportunity of being heard this year. An appeal had been made for delay, and the House had determined by a majority of two to one, that the hon. Members for Ireland had no case. He thought, therefore, he might in his turn appeal to the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Beamish) not to persevere with his Motion in the face of the decision of a large majority, nor avail himself of those forms of the House which certainly ought not to be resorted to on the present occasion.
MR. MACGUIREsaid, the distillers of the south of Ireland were, he knew, most anxious to express their opinions upon the subject, and that they had not done so was attributable to the fact that they were not cognisant of the time when the Bill was to come before the House. He would remind the House that the Irish Members were a small minority of the House, and that, therefore, they were driven to take advantage of its forms in order to impress their opinions on hon. Members. A request not to avail themselves of form, came with bad grace from the Treasury bench. He would also call the attention of the House to the fact that the Irish Members were unanimous in asking for this delay.
MR. DIGBY SEYMOUR: The appeal for delay was no doubt a very natural one, but after the division which had just been come to, it would be a more dignified course for Irish Members not to further obstruct the measure.
MR. KIRKhad no desire to obstruct the progress of legislation, but inasmuch as there seemed to be something behind respecting the question of drawbacks, he thought the Government would do well to accede to the appeal for delay.
MR. WILSONsaid, the suspicion with respect to Scotland was entirely unfounded.
COLONEL DUNNE: Although the Resolutions upon which this Bill is founded, were framed upon the 8th of May, yet the arrangement with regard to the drawback, was not made until much later, and therefore the Irish distillers have not had all that time for consideration. The Chancellor of the Exchequer gave us the old argument about the necessities of the war, but he trades too much upon the necessities of the war, and he ought to consider the proportion of duties to be placed upon different parts of the empire totally irre-

1257
spective of other considerations than the sum each should cost to make up the entire amount required for the purposes of the war. I am perfectly prepared to show the right hon. Gentleman that he is acting harshly towards Ireland, and that we are paying a much larger proportion of taxation than we ought to pay. If he denies that, let him give me a Committee composed of Members from different parts of the country, and I will prove it to them. I proposed this before, but the right hon. Gentleman refused to meet me. We will pay anything that we ought to pay. I am quite certain, that no Irishman refuses to support the war, either with his blood or with his money; but we are not to be proportionately over-taxed, because the Chancellor of the Exchequer chooses to say that the war is just and inevitable. I believe that war is inevitable now, and also, that it is just and necessary. I believe, however, that it might have been avoided, and certainly the Government have no right to trade upon it. I must say, that I see no use in going to a division upon this question, because it is perfectly certain that we shall be in a minority. If we divide, I shall vote of course with my countrymen; but I think that all we can do is, to add this as a fresh imposition to the list of wrongs and grievances inflicted on Ireland, contrary to all common sense and common justice, and to suffer it with patience.
MR. F. SCULLYthought it unfair to put the fair whisky trade in Ireland in a worse position than it was before. The Government would not lose anything by postponing the measure for a week, and as the Scotch distillers had already gained an advantage, he thought those of Ireland might gain something if time were afforded them. He did not approve of a factious course of opposition; but this measure was of importance to Ireland, sufficient to justify them in taking every proper course. He thought, however, the Irish Members had discharged their duty, and if Government persisted in a wrong course, on it rested the responsibility. He thought it better, on the whole, that his hon. Friend should withdraw his Motion.
MR. J. O'CONNELLobserved, that no Member on the part of the Government had replied to his argument, that this Bill was against the principles of free trade.
MR. BEAMISHsaid, he did not like to press his Motion to a division, knowing
1258
what the result would be; but he was in the hands of the House.
Motion made, and Question put, "That the Debate be now adjourned."
The House divided:—Ayes 23; Noes 71: Majority 48.
Main Question put, and agreed to.
Bill read 3°; Amendments made; Bill passed.

PUBLIC REVENUE AND CONSOLIDATED FUND CHARGES BILL.
Order for Committee read.
House in Committee.
Clause 1, enacting that charges in schedule A shall be payable out of the Consolidated Fund, and charges in schedule B to be voted,
THE CHANCELLOR OF TIIE EXCHEQUERsaid, that as this Bill, though it would, he believed, involve no difference of opinion, was one of great importance in connection with our fiscal arrangements, he was desirous of stating to the Committee its general frame-work, outline, and purpose. In the first place, he begged the Committee to observe that this Bill must be considered in conjunction with certain estimates which had within the last ten days for the first time been laid on the table of the House—he meant estimates of the charges of collecting the revenue in the various great departments. There was, however, one exception to this which the Committee should bear in mind, because the charges with which the collection of the land revenue of the Crown was burdened were not made the subject of any estimate. The reason was very simple:—the House of Commons, or, as he might say, the Legislature—were not in full and absolute possession of this land revenue, or of the estates from which it proceeded; the estates remained the estates of the Crown, and the country had the proceeds of those estates during the life of Her Majesty, upon the specific terms of the Civil List Act. That Act constituted a compact between Parliament and the Crown, and under the terms of that compact the expense of the management of the Crown estates was a deduction made anterior to the payment of the proceeds into the Exchequer. The estimates which had been presented related to what might be called the three great spending departments of the State—the Customs, the Board of Inland Revenue, and the Post Office; and they embraced together a sum of, he

1259
thought, not far short of 4,000,000 l. of money. The whole sum of 4,000,000 l. did not, he thought, appear in the Estimates, but the gross amount included drawbacks and repayments, which could not be made a subject of estimate. The Committee would perceive that there were certain schedules appended to the present Bill; and in relation to them he would enumerate what were the different descriptions of charges with which the Government had to deal in endeavouring to make this step towards a state of uniformity and simplicity in the mode of handling and accounting for public money—a State which he would not say would be realised by this Bill, but towards which they were, he trusted, approaching. The first class of charges, which was comprised in schedule A, consisted of certain charges and payments upon the revenues of Customs and Excise; that was to say, of certain charges which had been heretofore defrayed, not out of moneys which had cone into the Exchequer, but out of those various branches of the revenue before it reached the Exchequer. The Committee should understand that all these charges had been so defrayed with perfect regularity, because they had been defrayed under the distinct authority of Acts of Parliament. It was therefore no correction of an abuse, but it was an improvement in our system of public accounts which the present Bill proposed to effect; the Bill providing that, instead of paying these charges out of the revenue before it was received into the Exchequer, they should become charges on the Consolidated Fund, and, of course, the moneys now applied to pay them would henceforward be paid into the Consolidated Fund in the first instance. One small class of charges, at present defrayed out of the revenue before it reached the Exchequer, was not comprised in schedule A, and the Government proposed to leave it in its present condition, and for an obvious reason. The class to which he alluded consisted of a very limited number of pensions, which under various authorities, were paid to the representatives of various families, who inherited them from times comparatively remote. With respect to these pensions, it appeared clear—at least, this had been the view taken by Her Majesty's Government, and he thought it would be approved by the House—that the best course would be to buy them up and so dispose of them. He expected that, if
1260
judiciously effected, this operation would be rather a profitable arrangement to the public than otherwise, and it would rid them of an anomaly attended with some inconvenience. A certain portion of these pensions had been already bought up; in point of fact, he might say that, substantially, the whole matter was concluded so far as regarded the most important pensions; but, from one cause or another, the arrangement in several cases was nut yet ready to take effect. Until it did take effect—that was provisionally—he proposed to leave these pensions precisely as they were at present, inasmuch as the Government did not look upon them as permanent charges, and it was not worth while to enter upon new arrangements respecting them. The next great description of charge with which this Bill dealt was that of the expenses of the collection of the revenue. The very large outlay of public money under this head—amounting, he believed, to nearly 4,000,000 l.—which had heretofore been exempted from the control of the House, would, from the present year forwards, be brought regularly under its control and cognisance. It would he, however, but fair to make two observations on this subject. In the first place, the form of the estimate had been prepared for the present year in the manner that appeared to the Government, upon consideration, to be the best, and he had no doubt that, even if hon. Gentlemen thought it capable of improvement, it would be received with indulgence; but, of course, if it could be improved, either in form or substance, the Government would willingly co-operate in making any improvement upon it that might be devised. In the second place, if it should be found that these estimates added materially to the time which was now occupied in Committee of Supply, a serious public inconvenience might arise, and the House would have to consider of some means of meeting it; but he did not at present intend to propose any arrangement with respect to that subject, as it would be better that we should feel our way a little at first. The great practical advantage which he expected would arise from bringing these estimates before the House was, that a new security would thus be afforded for the performance of its duty by the Executive Government. Although he did not think it possible for the House, on ordinary occasions, to enter into minute details; yet the salutary result which he

1261
anticipated from voting money for the public service in this particular form was, that it would keep the different departments of the State up to their work. He believed that this was the important result which would be effected by the change he proposed to make, and upon which he begged to congratulate the House, and especially that hon. Gentleman (Mr. Williams) who had so distinguished himself by his patient recommendations in former years upon this subject, when it was less popular than at present. He had now spoken of the various descriptions of charges with which the Government proposed directly to deal; first, the various charges imposed on the revenue by Act of Parliament, which would be carried to the Consolidated Fund; secondly, the expenses of the collection of the revenue, which would be carried to the votes; and thirdly, the pensions, which would remain at present as they were, as he expected shortly to get rid of them altogether. But, as they had been led in the course of this operation to carry certain charges to the Consolidated Fund, they had thought it was their duty, as a part of the operation, to institute, as far as it was in the discretion of the Treasury to institute, a revision of the charges already upon the Consolidated Fund—for it was his strong opinion that there was no matter in which this house had been more apt to be led into laxity in the discharge of its duty than in that of laying upon the Consolidated Fund charges which it ought not to bear. The practical consequence of their doing so was, that those charges were placed, in some measure, beyond the control of the Treasury, they were forgotten by this House, and there was a great deal of neglect and abuse connected with this part of the public service. He had no proposal to make upon that subject at present, but he thought it would not be a bad arrangement if some mode could be devised by which the House could ensure a periodical attention to the state of the charges on the Consolidated Fund. In many cases the question of whether a particular charge ought to be laid on the Consolidated Fund or presented to the House in the Estimates was a political question of great importance. He would refer as instances to two charges—both from Ireland—the charges connected with the Board of Charitable Bequests, and also to those connected with the College of Maynooth—obviously constituting cases with respect to which it was a most important matter, of high poli-
1262
tical concern, whether they should be discussed in the Votes or laid upon the Consolidated Fund. He considered that he should have been going beyond the limits of his duty in connection with one public department, if he had proposed by this measure to interfere with any great political questions, and, therefore, in the case of charges involving any great political question, or appearing to involve a question of good faith and of public contract, in which vested interests, which might fairly be so called, were concerned, he had left upon the Consolidated Fund whatever he had found upon it. He might also advert, under this head, to charges of the kind of the salaries of Judges. Of course, with respect to the Judges of Westminster Hall, he imagined that no one, considering the important position they occupied as great constitutional officers, would wish to see their salaries brought into the Votes; but with respect to minor Judges, although there were already certain cases in which their salaries were voted by this House, yet he thought the question was not one that ought to be dealt with incidentally, and as a matter merely of fiscal arrangement; and, therefore, as a general rule, he had left upon the Consolidated Fund all the salaries of Judges which he had found there, although he did not propose that certain salaries of Judges which he had not found there should be placed upon it. There were, however, certain classes of officers who discharged duties that might be called judicial, such as revising barristers, whose salaries it was proposed to take from the Consolidated Fund and place in the Votes. Although the salaries of Judges would be left upon the Consolidated Fund, all the collateral, incidental, subordinate expenses of courts of justice, great and small, they proposed to bring into the Votes—for there was no department in which the control of the Treasury, apart from that of the House, would be weaker and more ineffective than in this. It was, therefore, desirable that the control of the House should be brought to bear upon them. This was the principle upon which the Government had proceeded in the present Bill; they had dealt in the manner that reason and convenience appeared to dictate with respect to those descriptions of charges with which they were obliged to deal; and as the state of the charges upon the Consolidated Fund necessarily came under their review, in so doing they had so far made a revision of those charges

1263
as they could make such a revision a matter of fiscal arrangement. The Bill, however, was not intended to alter the actual course of the public disbursements, although it altered the machinery of the public accounts. He now alluded to the matter of provincial payments towards the expenses of collecting the revenue out of funds which were locally collected. They did not propose to make any change in that respect. For example, under one authority or another, the Collector of the Customs at Liverpool at present defrayed, out of the revenue he collected there, both the expenses of the Customs' establishment and other public expenses, such as half-pay, pensions, &c., before it arrived in London; and they did not propose to alter the system, as it would be both an inconvenience and a retrograde step instead of advancing, if they had the money after it was collected transmitted to head quarters, in order that it might then be retransmitted to the provinces. The intention of the arrangement was this—that, although the disbursement would take place as it did now, it would be subject to exactly the same system of account. The account would be made up precisely as it was for all other voted services. He might compare it with the great number of services, the expenses of were necessarily defrayed in the Colonies by the Commissariat before Exchequer credits had been issued for them; those services were still just as much the subjects of vote in that House as if they had been defrayed by Exchequer grants, but the principle of account was applied to them. With this general explanation he trusted the Bill would obtain the approbation of the House.
MR. HUMEsaid, the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman was for the present extremely satisfactory; and he was glad to find that the present Government had yielded to the opinions expressed by the House, that the whole revenue ought to be paid into the Exchequer. He trusted that next year the House would be able to revise all the complicated accounts placed upon the Consolidated Fund. He differed from the right hon. Gentleman as to the Crown lands. He thought that by agreement with Her Majesty they were as much placed under the control of the public as the Post Office or the Customs. As for the pensions, the sooner they were cleared away the better. He would suggest that these accounts be referred to a Select Committee of the House, for unless they
1264
were submitted to examination and report, the plan would lead to comparatively little good. That course would be perfectly satisfactory, and would greatly save the time of the House. Upon the whole, he congratulated the House upon the progress that had been achieved. They now saw a beginning made towards placing in the hand of Parliament a complete control over the expenditure of the country, and he hoped that in a year or two hence the same system would be extended and perfected.
MR. GLYNbegged to express his acknowledgments to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the introduction of this measure. He had always been surprised that a matter which seemed so simple and easy had in previous years been so strongly resisted by the Treasury; and he had been only surprised—as long as he had been in Parliament—that the subject to which it related had ever been a disputed question. As the right hon. Gentleman had undertaken these duties in adjusting the fiscal arrangements of the country, would he allow him (Mr. Glyn) to point out another step that might be taken with great public advantage? They had heard a great deal, and perhaps too much lately, respecting the state of the public balances in the Bank of England; and the fallacy which had so generally prevailed as to the large advances which were supposed to be made to the Government had turned out to be almost nothing, and hardly worthy of any comment whatever. It appeared to him that for several years past the financial policy of the Government had always been to have a surplus revenue over the expenditure, in order that at no period should there be any necessity for large advances from the Bank. But the possibility of any advance being required could only arise from the want of adjustment between the receipts and expenditure of the country. Previous to the year 1844 or 1845, the periodical payments of the public revenue were two in a year; but the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge (Mr. Goulbourn) then introduced a change by spreading the payments over four periods in the year. Still that was not so great an alteration as the amounts of the Government required; and if the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer could only manage to throw the payments more equally over the year, so as to make them tally with the receipts, nothing could be more calculated

1265
to relieve the circulation of the country, or to prevent all the chances of pressure upon the Bank; this would be one of the most important steps that had ever been taken to ensure the financial prosperity of the country.
MR. W. WILLIAMSconsidered that the measure now introduced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer was one of the most important financial reforms ever submitted to Parliament. It had frequently been brought forward before, but it had always been opposed by the Government until the right hon. Gentleman acceded to office. This Bill contained fifty-seven items, most of which related to Government departments; and hitherto the expenditure in them had been entirely without the sanction or even the cognisance of the House. The right hon. Gentleman appeared to apprehend that these estimates might occupy too much of the time of the House; but he thought that that difficulty had been much overrated; for he had no doubt that the estimates would be prepared with such care that they would leave no room for fault to be found with them. He hoped he had understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that the provincial expenditure would come into the accounts like the rest; only that the money would not be required to be sent to London and then sent back again? [The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER intimated assent]. Now he was quite satisfied on that score. For the first time in the history of Parliament the House would have a control over the whole expenditure with the exception of the interest on the debt and some other charges, which amounted to about 2,500,000 l. a year. He most cordially thanked the right hon. Gentleman for the important step he had taken, and trusted that he would proceed still further in the path of fiscal reform.
MR. HADFIELDsuggested that all pensions and sinecures in the Ecclesiastical Courts, the salaries in the Court of Queen's Bench, the expenses connected with the Regium Donum and the Ecclesiastical Commission should be brought under the revision of the House.
MR. HUMEsaid, it might be some satisfaction to the country to know that that House had resolved to put an end to all sinecure and useless offices connected with the army and every other department of the State excepting the Church. If the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hadfield) would look to the Report of the Select Committee upon sinecures, he would find that no
1266
pensions could be granted beyond the amount of 1,200 l. a year voted to Her Majesty for that purpose.
Mr. KIRKconsidered that the Regium Donum which had been alluded to was one of the most advantageous payments that could be made from the public funds.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER,said the question of equalising the time of payments and receipts of the Exchequer, as suggested by the hon. Member for Kendal (Mr. Glyn) was a subject of the greatest importance, and was occupying his attention.
Clause agreed to, as were the remaining clauses.
House resumed; Bill reported without Amendments.

COUNTIES AND BOROUGH POLICE.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTON,in moving for leave to bring in a Bill to render more effectual the police in counties and boroughs in England and Wales, said that the details of the Bill could be seen at a future stage, and that it was unnecessary for him now to dwell upon the advantages arising both to counties and the country from an efficient police. The Bill proposed that in every county a Board should be established under which the police were to be placed; the Bill also provided for more effectual police arrangements in boroughs.
MR. MASSEYsaid, that if the noble Lord intended to make a police force compulsory in counties, he should oppose such a measure to the utmost of his power.
MR. DEEDESwas glad that the present measure had been introduced by the Government, as he considered the whole of the question required looking into. Although he did not agree with those who considered a compulsory police requisite for all counties, yet he would examine the present Bill with every desire to do the best for the interest of the counties and the country.
SIR G. PECHELLobjected to any arrangement for the amalgamation of the police of counties and large towns which would interfere with the free action of town councils and other corporate bodies.
MR. FLOYERsaid, the noble Lord had not told them how the Board of which he spoke was to be composed. If it was to consist of any other than magistrates, it would interfere with the authority of the latter over their own officers. He thought the Bill of last year relating to convicts, and which rendered a larger police force

1267
necessary, gave counties a claim for a certain portion, at least, of the police expenses being defrayed from other sources than the county rate.
MR. THORNELYhoped the Bill would not interfere with town councils in the management of their police.
LORD DUDLEY STUARThoped the Government was not going to extend the provisions of this Bill to the whole of the country. It was desirable that nothing should be done to impair the system of local government.
SIR BENJAMIN HALLsupported the Bill, believing it to be right to make the establishment of a police force compulsory, and to amalgamate the police in boroughs and counties. He was sure the Bill would be hailed with satisfaction by the country.
MR. MICHELLsaid, that the people in the western part of the country would receive this Bill with very great dissatisfaction, if a portion of the expenses were not paid out of the Consolidated Fund.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONwas aware that this was a subject of great difficulty as well as importance, and one on which considerable difference of opinion was to be expected. No doubt, the best police, if they simply looked to its efficiency as a preventive force, would be a police raised on the principle of the Irish, or the metropolitan police, acting under the orders of Government, and uniform in its organisation and in the principle of its operation; but he attached great importance to the principle of local self-government. He thought it was quite impossible to overrate the great national importance of employing the persons connected with the different districts of the country in administering the affairs of those districts, so far as it was possible to do so. He should be very sorry on that ground to place the police of the country under a separate government and control, like that of London. At the same time he thought there should be an inspection in the different localities, in order to secure something like uniformity of system; because if a different system prevailed between the police of one county and of another, there could not be that efficiency which it was essential to produce. What he therefore proposed was, with respect to counties, that the board should consist, not of the magistrates of counties, as at present, but that there should be an election of a certain limited number of magistrates, by whom the duties would be more efficiently performed. With regard
1268
to the boroughs, what he proposed was, that the smaller boroughs, the population of which did not exceed a certain amount, should be so far amalgamated with the counties that the magistrates or mayors of the boroughs should be members of the county board, and that the police of the county and of the borough should be so far combined as that the borough should have their share of the county police, and the county police should have their share of the police of the borough. He should leave the larger towns as they now were, with a police board, composed of the magistrates of the town. He thought the House would see that there was a reason for this; for, though the larger towns might be able to afford an establishment adequate to their wants, yet the smaller towns might not, and therefore he allowed them to participate with the counties. It was quite true, as the hon. Member (Mr. Floyer) had said, that owing to the change in the system of punishments by which convicts were no longer sent out to the colonies as transports for a limited period of years, a greater reason existed for rendering the police more efficient. The measure which he now proposed he hoped would accomplish that object. He should be ready to attend to any suggestions which hon. Members might offer, whose local knowledge must necessarily be greater than his own.
Leave given; Bill ordered to be brought in by Viscount Palmerston and Mr. FitzRoy.
Bill read 1°.
The House adjourned, at Twelve o'clock, till Thursday next.