Sitting of 25 July 1834

MINUTES.
New Writ ordered. For the Eastern Division of Gloucestershire, in the room of Sir WILLIAM GUISE, Baronet, deceased.
Bills. Read a third time:—Newspapers Postage; Quare Impedit Actions; Friendly Societies.—Read a second time:—Dean Forest; Arms Importation (Ireland).
Petitions presented. By Sir JOHN TYRELL, and Messrs. FINCH, MILES, and FORSTER, from several Places, for Protection to the Church of England.—By Mr. MILES, from Whittington, against; and by Mr. WILKS, from Llannely,—in favour of the Dissenters.—By Mr. D. O'CONNOR, and Mr. F. SHAW, from several Places, for Protection to the Irish Protestant Church.—By Captain DUNLOP, from Renfrew, against a Local Act; from Kilmarnock, for Relief to the Handloom Weavers.—By Mr. COBBETT, from Eye, against a Clause in the Highway Act; from Kilgureer, against Tithes in Ireland.—By Lord JOHN RUSSELL, from Hitchen and Potter, for placing Retailers of Beer on a footing with Licensed Victuallers.—By Mr. WILKS, from Frampton, for an Inquiry into the Charitable Funds in that Place; from Holbeach, against the Church Rates Bill.—By Sir GEORGE MURRAY, from two Places, for Protection to the Church of Scotland.—By Mr. BUCKINGHAM, and Dr. LUSHINGTON, from two Places,—against Drunkenness.—By Dr. LUSHINGTON, and Mr. CHARLES RUSSELL, from Ampthill, and Castle Tonington, for Protection from Incendiaries.—By Mr. BUCKINGHAM, from the Corporation of Dublin, for the Better Observance of the Sabbath.—By Mr. SHEIL, from the Catholic Clergy of Killala, for Assistance to form a Seminary in that Diocese.—By Mr. CHRISTMAS, from Waterford, for Parliamentary Papers.—By Mr. PETER, from Penzance and St. Ives, for the Repeal of the Reciprocity of Duties Act.—By Sir H. CAMPBELL, from Renfrew, against the Poor-Law Amendment Bill.—By the ATTORNEY GENERAL, from the Debtors in the King's Bench Prison, for causing the Discharge of those Debtors who have petitioned for and are entitled to it.—By Mr. MARK PHILIPS, from the Chamber of Commerce, Manchester, and from Staley Bridge, for the Repeal of the Duty on Cotton Wool.—By Mr. ABERCROMBY, from the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce, against the Bankrupts (Scotland) Bill.

BRITISH FISHERMEN.
Mr. Baringrose to present two Petitions, one from fishermen of Essex, and the other from fishermen of Jersey, &c., engaged in the channel fisheries, complaining of annoyances which they experienced from the French authorities while fishing off the French coast. The subject was of immediate importance to the petitioners, inasmuch as it concerned the means of obtaining their subsistence by the exercise of what they considered the right of British subjects; but it was not of importance to them only, it was of the greatest consequence to the country. He was glad that the noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) had attended to hear the petitions stated; he, therefore, doubted not that the noble Lord would give the subject that serious consideration which it deserved. The first petition was from some fishermen of Berkhampstead, in Essex, the other was from a large body of persons in the Isle of Jersey, interested in the same industrious trade. Their statement was, that from time immemorial they were in the habit, up to the year 1821, of dredging for oysters in the seas between Jersey and France, and it was well known that those coasts furnished the oysters which supplied the beds at the mouth of the Thames; and besides, these fisheries furnished this country with a great number of excellent seamen. The question, therefore, was of the greatest importance to this country. The statement was, that from the year 1821, the French began to molest the fishermen of this country, and disputes arose as to how near they might approach the French coast? He would refer upon this subject to the opinion of the hon. and learned member for the Tower Hamlets (Dr. Lushington), than whom no better authority could well be adduced. The statement of the hon. and learned Doctor was, that the question must be determined in the first instance on the principle of the law of nations. The law of nations prescribed that every country had the right to prevent the inhabitants of any other state fishing within gunshot of their coast, which was estimated to be a maritime league from low-water mark. The learned Gentleman went on to say, that although the question must be settled primarily by the law of nations, the particular right of a country might be affected by long custom and usage, and that the rights granted by the law of nations might

477
be interfered with by long-established custom. He was inclined to think the question had now lain dormant so long that, exclusive of the molestation which had taken place, we should, if the question were not further mooted, suffer a custom and usage to be established that might be fatal to the right. The statement of the petitioners was, that they continued to exercise their right of fishing, when they were interfered with by the French, who stationed three cruisers to put an end to their proceedings, laid claim to an extent much exceeding their former limits of the French fisheries, and declared that custom and usage were in favour of their claim. It was the opinion of the learned individual to whom he had alluded, that by usage an exclusive right to fish beyond three miles of the French coast might possibly be established by the inhabitants of that country, but it was not possible such a right could be established except upon the principle of usage. When the complaint was made the depositions of the fishermen who had been molested by the French were taken before the Magistrates at Colchester, and those depositions were all confirmatory of the facts of the case which were stated by the petitioners, and the Magistrates expressed the high opinion they entertained of the credibility of the witnesses who had given evidence on the subject. The hon. Member then read the observations made on the occasion, which concluded by observing, that the grievances complained of by the English fishermen were of recent date, and that as many as sixteen English fishing vessels had been forcibly taken into the harbour of Granville, for fishing within three miles of the French coast. The subject had, be understood, been under the consideration of the French government for many years; and in the year 1824 an order was issued by the Government of this country to our English cruisers to take care not to give protection to any English fishermen who should be found fishing beyond the limits of the maritime league. The King's Government being desirous to avoid any hostile collision between the two countries issued a second order, declaring, that until the question was decided, the English fishing vessels should keep without two leagues of the French coast; and this was the situation in which the matter now stood. This arrangement, however, was understood to
478
continue in existence pending the agitation of the question. The complaint of the petitioners, therefore, was, that from the year 1821, until the present time, the French being perfectly satisfied with the temporary arrangement that had been thus made, and acceded to by the Government of this country, no final adjustment had been effected. By this arrangement there was a line of shoals, extending upwards of twenty-five miles along the French coast, which were not used by the fishermen of that country, and from which the English fishermen were prohibited. Under these circumstances, he trusted the noble Lord opposite would see the vast importance of the subject to the people of England generally, as well as the individuals whose craft were so seriously affected by the existing arrangement, and that he would set himself seriously about effecting a solid settlement of the question. The noble Lord had said on a former occasion, that the statements had been rattier of an exaggerated nature, and that the English fishermen were much to blame; but he could assure the noble Lord that they had never been afforded a fair hearing. He trusted the House would not suppose, that either the petitioners or himself were indifferent to the importance of maintaining a good understanding between this country and France. He believed it to be the wish of every man of common sense, and had been ever since the destruction of Napoleon, that nothing should be done to interfere with the friendly understanding that subsisted between this country and France; and if the noble Lord declared that we could not maintain and defend the rights of our fishermen in the Channel, the noble Lord must have put the diplomatic relations subsisting between the two countries on a footing that was neither consistent with common sense nor common justice. He would present the petitions to which he had alluded, sincerely hoping the subject would be speedily inquired into. He was satisfied the interference of the noble Lord would be much better than the interference of the House; but if some adjustment did not take place during the recess, he should feel it to be his duty to call the attention of the House to the subject in the next Session of Parliament.
On the Motion that they do lie on the Table,
Viscount Palmerstonsaid, nothing could be more fair than the temperate

479
manner in which the subject had been introduced by the hon. Member. As the whole subject of the English fisheries was under the consideration of Government, he should not be expected, for obvious reasons, to say anything that might prejudice the claim of the petitioners. With respect to the limits of the Jersey oyster-fisheries, the hon. Member had very correctly stated, they were fixed by common consent; but it must not be supposed that that arrangement was final, being merely a provisional arrangement made between the commanders of the French and English cruisers, for the satisfaction of both parties, until a final adjustment could be made by the Government of each country. While, on the one hand, our fishermen were bound to keep without the limits until the ultimate adjustment was effected, yet, on the other hand, the Government of this country was not precluded from appealing to the government of France upon the question, and coming to a satisfactory arrangement. He regretted, however, it was not in his power to meet the wishes of the petitioners by giving to our Ambassador at Paris instructions to take up the question with a view to effecting a final arrangement with France. In legislating on the question he found it to be much more comprehensive than he at first imagined. He had considered it quite confined to the fishing between Jersey and the coast of France; but he found it involved a much more general question, a question of great legal nicety, extending back to a long period, and he felt that he should not be doing his duty to the subject, if he neglected to give it the very fullest inquiry, in order to gratify the impatience of any class of individuals. The hon. Member had said, the petitioners were dissatisfied with some expressions that had fallen from him on a former occasion, when the subject was before the House. What he had said was, that in almost every case that had come within his knowledge in which English fishing-boats had been captured by French cruisers, it had been found that the English fishermen had trespassed beyond the line which had been mutually agreed upon as the boundary which should limit the fisheries of the two countries. He had a Report from the Commander of the Station, dated the 5th of May, stating, that six vessels, detained by the French authorities, had been all in the wrong, and
480
gone some miles within the limit, notwithstanding the signals of warning given to withdraw. He had derived similar information from the authorities off Jersey. He would not, however, say, that the practice was general, but whenever the French authorities interfered, our people were for the most part in the wrong. He was perfectly aware of the great importance of this subject, and felt it his duty to give it his most serious attention, with a view to see whether some measures of a satisfactory nature could not be adopted, which he would have done before, had he not been prevented by other pressing business, and by the extent of this question, which, on looking into it, he found to be much larger and more important than he had at first imagined. The arrangement come to by the respective Commanders of the two countries, until the matter could be adjusted between the two Governments, was, that the fishermen should not come within two maritime leagues of the French coast, and that being the arrangement, till the question could be adjusted, our fishermen were bound to obey it. To protect the fishermen this Government maintained a cutter off the stations—that was its special duty; and when our fishermen had been molested, they had disregarded the arrangement. The six vessels belonging to Colchester, Jersey, and Southampton, which had been interrupted and detained, and to which he had just alluded, all went within the limits. He had special Reports on the subject, and read the heads of them. Some went two miles within the limits, some more; but all six were in the wrong. Those who sent him the Report had no interest in misrepresenting the facts. [Mr. Baring: Had the wind not driven them in?] He had understood not. Some went four miles within the limits, and, after the firing of twelve signal guns by our cruizer to warn them of their error. He did not say, that the neglect of the arrangement was general. There were between 200 and 300 vessels engaged in these fisheries; he believed many of them attended strictly to the limits that had been agreed upon; but in this, as in all other pursuits of this kind, there were many persons of a roving disposition, some few of them regular poachers, and it was this class of individuals who had principally suffered, though it was probable some innocent persons had unfortunately

481
suffered among them. He did not think the French authorities had been guilty of those systematic severities that had been imputed to them, every attention having been paid to the complaints that had been brought before them. He knew the interests of a great number of his Majesty's subjects were affected by the existing arrangements, and he could assure the hon. Member he had put the subject in a regular train of inquiry, but feared, from the extensive character of the bearings of the question, so speedy an adjustment could not necessarily take place, as he, with many Members of the House, most earnestly desired.
Sir Robert Peelobserved, if he were asked, what was most likely to produce ill-will between the two countries, he should reply, that nothing was so calculated to create such a fatal result as these constant squabbles about the rights of fishing; and as that was the case, and as nothing could be more unsatisfactory than the present state of the question, he thought it was of paramount importance that the Government should attend to it. The present was a mere provisional arrangement, and yet it had continued since 1821; it was unsatisfactory because such an arrangement could not be viewed as law. He thought a negotiation should take place with a view to a proper treaty between the two nations, to be confirmed by an Act of Parliament. Nothing, in his opinion, could be more serious than the question that might hereafter arise on an attempt to enforce the limits which had been mutually agreed upon by the commanding officers of the French and English cruisers, being admitted by both countries to be merely provisional arrangements, and not having the force of law. So far as our own fishermen were concerned, he had no doubt they had frequently transgressed the boundary, and as the law at present stood, he very much questioned whether, if a French officer were to kill an English fisherman, difficulties of a most serious nature would not arise. The noble Lord said, he was informed, that in each case our fishermen were in the wrong, and he had no doubt they were; but if an English fisherman went within the line, declaring the law to be in his favour, and refusing to recognize the arrangement that had been entered into between the two countries, he apprehended all that could be done by the Eng-
482
lish Government was to withdraw that protection from him, to which every other English subject was entitled, and leave him entirely to the mercy of the French law. The fishermen knew, however, that they were allowed to go within a league of the French coast, but, if there was no special arrangement, how was that to be measured? If it were said from low-water mark, in some places the tide seceded miles over the flat ground, and in others it only sank a few feet on the surface of the steep rocks. Under such circumstances, it was difficult for the fishermen to judge of their distance from the boundary. Altogether the question was as difficult as it was important, and it could not be settled by a reference to the law of nations. He trusted, that France would lend herself to the amicable settlement of this question which could not be decided by individual cases. It was for the interest of both nations that this question should be settled without delay, for one day's war would be more costly than all the oysters caught in a century would be worth. If the question were left unsettled the national honour would get involved, and peace would be disturbed. The fishermen of both countries were a bold and gallant race of men, full of national prejudice and jealousy, and their quarrels might breed a war between the two countries. He could not consider that the country was safe while this question was left open.
Sir E. Codringtonsaid, that as both parties believed themselves to be in the right, and ready to fight for what they deemed their right, it was most important that the question should be settled.
Sir J. Tyrellsupported the petitions, and concurred in the sentiments that had fallen from the hon. Member who had presented them. He agreed in the importance of the question, and trusted, that the noble Lord would lose no time in attending to the subject, and that, by the next Session, the noble Lord might be able to give some satisfactory statement. respecting it.
Mr. Baringbegged to remind the noble Lord, that the fishing commenced in September.
Petitions to lie on the Table.

INCREASE OF OFFICES.
Lord Althorp Lord Althorp moved the Order of the Day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means.
Mr. Goulburnsaid, that he would avail himself of the present opportunity to bring under the consideration of the House a question to which he had often adverted in the course of the present Session. The House would recollect that at an early period of the present Session, he had called for a return of the number of offices created under Acts of Parliament which had been passed, and under various commissions which had been issued, during the last Session. The delays which had occurred in making up that return, prevented him from laving before the House a complete picture of what had taken place, but he would endeavour to give the House an outline of the extent to which the creation of offices had been carried. It was necessary, by Act of Parliament, that Government should make to Parliament, every year, a statement of the increase or diminution of the amount of salaries in the several public offices, and that statement included, of course, the number of offices that had been increased or diminished in the same time. If the House should be governed by the paper which had been that year laid upon the Table, and if they should suppose it to present a real statement of the increase or diminution of offices, they would be much and grossly deceived. For it would appear from that paper, that in the year 1833 there had been an increase of 128 new offices, and a diminution of 221 old ones, leaving a balance of ninety-three in favour of the diminution of offices. But the facts of the case were very different. He would confine himself at present to the year 1833, because that was a year of which the returns were partially before the House, and to which it was only necessary that he should refer at present. It appeared that during the year 1833, nine commissions had issued, and ten acts had been passed, under which various appointments had been made. There were also other appointments, of which no returns had been made, because the time for making them had not yet arrived. Of those appointment he should take no notice, but should found his argument entirely upon the documents now on the Table. The official paper, containing a return of the increase and diminution of offices, presented, as he had already told the House, a diminution of 221 old offices, and an increase of 128 new ones. But when he looked at certain returns, which
484
had been subsequently made, he discovered that instead of a balance of ninety-three offices in favour of reduction, as there would be, supposing that the increase had been 128, and the reduction 221, there was a balance of 332 in favour of the augmentation of patronage, as there had been 553 new offices created, and only 221 reduced. Let the House consider the effect of this in point of expense. From the official paper it appeared, that there had been a diminution of 30,000 l. during the year, in the amount of salaries; but when the House looked at the whole state of the case, as it appeared upon other public returns, it would be found that, instead of any diminution, there was an actual augmentation of salaries to the amount of 85,000 l. during the year, for the whole amount of salaries of the offices created in the year, was 115,000 l. He would read to the House a brief abstract of the offices which had been created, 425 of which he found by the returns were not enumerated in the official paper. In this number of offices, there was one,—and he believed there was another, that held by Mr. Macaulay, but of which no return had been made. In the number of offices created, he said there was, besides that held by Mr. Macaulay, one of 6,000 l. a year. Of offices of 3,000 l. a-year and under 6,000 l. there was also one; of offices of 2,000 l. and under 3,000 l. one; of offices of 1,000 l. and under 2,000 l. thirty-two; of offices of 800 l. and under 1,000 l. seven; of offices of 600 l. and under 800 l. four; of offices of 400 l. and under 600 l. eight; of offices of 200 l. and under 400 l. 141; of offices of 200 l. and under—230; making the total of offices created, 425. This, be it observed, was in one year, and the expense of salaries was 115,000 l. That expense resulting from new arrangements, was an object to which the consideration of the House might be fairly called; and it was for that reason that he had moved for these returns, being convinced that if the House were determined to pursue a career of economy, it ought to look not only to the salaries which were paid out of the funds over which it had control, but also to the salaries of offices created and paid out of funds over which it had no control. The Members of the present Government maintained that they conducted the affairs of the State with less regard to patronage, than the Members of any Government which had preceded

485
them. He would not enter into any discussion whether that statement were true or not; but this he would say, that if any Government had been anxious to create offices for the sake of increasing its patronage, it could not have adopted a better course to accomplish that object than that which was developed in the measures of the present Ministers, for they carefully proclaimed the offices which they abolished, whilst they concealed the offices which they created so carefully, that without ferreting into every hole and corner, it was impossible to come to the knowledge of them. If patronage were the object of a government, then this mode of accomplishing it was among the best that could be devised, for classes of offices were created to suit the taste of every class of customers. Here were offices under 200 l. a year for the lower classes; here were offices under 400 l. a year for the middling classes; here were also other offices for persons of higher rank, who could return service of equal value for the patronage which they received from Government. Among the persons whom it must be the desire of every Government to conciliate were those connected with the legal profession. They were a class of persons whom it was
important for Government to conciliate—they were well educated—they had the power of explaining and diffusing their opinions—they were in the custom of advocating causes of all descriptions, though he would not say that they were in the habit of advocating bad causes, and making the worse appear the better reason, and that therefore they must be particularly useful to the present Government. They were generally men of character; they lived among the best classes, and, from their avocations in life, had an influence over all classes. Now, how many barristers did the House imagine was included in this return? He had made a memorandum of the number, but had mislaid it. He was sure, however, that he was under the mark when he said that there were 105 barristers included in it. He knew that it would be answered to him that many of these commissions created offices of great importance, and that it was necessary that they should be created to forward the interests of the public service. Be it so. Let the House look then at the mode in which these appointments were made, and let it see
486
whether they were made to facilitate the public service, or whether there were not grounds to support the charge which he now preferred against his Majesty's Government. He would not detain the House by going into details regarding all the offices contained in the return. He would take one or two as a sample of the whole. In the course of last Session, Parliament voted a million to be distributed among the clergy of the Church of Ireland, in order to enable them to support themselves until a definite arrangement was made respecting tithes. The sum granted by Parliament was, as he had just stated, a million. The number of parishes in Ireland was 2,500, and the number of benefices was 1,250. The applicants, then, for this fund, could not, at the most, exceed 2,500, and would, in all probability, fall short of it. In those reprobate times, which it was the fashion to call Tory times, if any member of the Government had been called upon to distribute this sum, he would have made an addition of two or three clerks to some public department to meet the pressure of the emergency, and those clerks would have been employed so long as that pressure continued, but no longer. The distribution of this money might, in the times of Toryism, have added at most a dozen clerks to the Secretary's office in Ireland. He spoke with some degree of knowledge on that subject, for he had enjoyed the honour of holding that office, and he knew, that though some assistance would have been necessary, half a dozen additional clerks would have been quite sufficient. What said the return now upon the Table? In order to give effect to the distribution of 1,000,000 l. among 2,400 persons at the most, not less than 114 persons had been appointed, and a separate office had been created, under the title of "The Tithe-owners' Relief Fund Bill-office." He would not say, that his calling for this return had frightened the Irish Government, but it somehow or other happened that it went on creating two or three clerks every day up to the 10th of April, and this return of his was ordered on the 15th. What would the House think, when it found that out of these 114 appointments, 70 of them were those of clerks? He knew that in the Secretary's office, with the duties of which he was acquainted, there was great labour to be performed. It had to conduct all the

487
correspondence of the civil Government. It had to superintend the Reports and Proceedings of the Police, and it thus required a great number of hands. He found, however, that all the business of that office was conducted by eighteen clerks. In the office of Secretary of War, which controlled all the expense of all our regiments in Great Britain, Ireland, and every other part of the world, there were not more than thirty clerks. The Secretary of State for the Home Department, with a small number of clerks, conducted all the internal affairs of the country. And yet, under a government which disclaimed all patronage, twice as many clerks were required to distribute a million among 2,500 persons, as were employed in the Home-office in England, in the Secretary's-office in Ireland, and in the office of the Secretary at War. So much for the clerks. He next came to the barristers, who had been appointed to assist the assisting barristers; and how stood the case here? In Ireland, there were thirty-two assistant-barristers,—and the present Government had appointed forty more to assist them—a man a-piece one would have thought sufficient, but the Government had appointed forty. It might however be said, that in making this comparison, there were no clear grounds on which to form your estimate. He begged pardon—there were such grounds. In the last Session of Parliament a sum of 20,000,000 l. was granted as compensation to the West-Indian proprietors, and was to be distributed among them. Now, to distribute that sum over all our Colonial possessions in all parts of the world, the number of appointments, as stated in this paper, only amounted to sixty, and yet 114 persons were required to distribute 1,000,000 l. in Ireland. He could not understand how the noble Lord opposite, controlling as he did the expenses of all the departments in the State, could give his sanction to such a proceeding. He had no doubt, that his right hon. friend opposite would admit that he had been guilty of "a great indiscretion" in permitting it; and though there was no occasion to ask his right hon. friend what Cabinet Minister assisted him in "that great indiscretion," he thought that there was sufficient occasion for him to ask his right hon. friend how he intended to justify it. He knew that the House was anxious to go into the Com-
488
mittee to discuss the Budget. He thought, however, that this subject was worthy the attention of the House, and he knew no occasion when an explanation of it could be more satisfactorily obtained than the present. The House ought to exercise ten-fold vigilance with regard to the patronage over which it had no direct control; and if it found that the confidence reposed in the Government by Acts of Parliament was abused, it had a right to demand explanation.
Mr. Littletondid not rise to reply to the general observations of the right hon. Gentleman, but merely to account for the appointment of the number of clerks and assisting barristers, who had been employed in distributing the Tithe Relief Fund granted last Session. He would undertake to show the House, that the work which had been accomplished by them, could not have been accomplished in so short a time, had not such a number been employed. He scarcely needed to repeat that one million was granted last Session for the relief of the tithe-owners. The result of that grant had been, that not less than 2,490 schedules or memorials had been presented for relief. Few of those schedules contained less than 200 names; many of them contained from 2,000 to 3,000 names. The provision of that grant was, that 15 per cent should be deducted from the claims of 1833, and 25 and 30 per cent from the claims of 1831 and 1830. These memorials were sent to the different assistant-barristers in the different counties to be adjudicated upon. It was impossible for the assistant-barristers to adjudicate upon them, as their avocations on the Sessions and their other professional duties interfered, without assistance. As they must have been paid five guineas a-day for their labour, it did not create any additional expense to appoint other barristers to assist in performing this service. Assisting barristers were, therefore, appointed; and as it was necessary to distribute this fund without delay, to prevent several of the clergy from starving, a great number was appointed. That was at once a wise and humane policy. With regard to the clerks employed, it was quite necessary that they should be so numerous, in order to calculate the reductions within a given time. Sir William Gossett, who was conversant with matters of account, had calculated that it would take one man

489
fifty-eight years to complete the account of these reductions. It was necessary, however, that it should be completed by November last; and, therefore, it became requisite to employ a good many hands in completing it. These clerks were paid two guineas a week. His right hon. friend seemed to think, that by calling for this return, he had frightened the Irish Government from making further appointments; but so far was the Irish Government from being frightened, that it was only the other day that he had written to Sir W. Gossett to put on any number of hands he might think proper to expedite the business, so as to have it ready by next September.
Mr. Henry Grattan,asked the right hon. Gentleman whether he had not supported the Bill of last Session for distributing a million among the distressed clergymen of the Church of Ireland? The clergy asked for justice; and now, when the million was distributed, was it justice to advocate a node of proceeding which, had it been adopted, would have prevented the distribution of the grant? The assistant barristers were employed at the Sessions; and it was, therefore, necessary to appoint other barristers to perform this public service. There were thirty-two counties in Ireland, and some of them were divided into districts. Now, to these thirty-two counties, with their subdivisions, not more than forty barristers had been appointed.
Mr. Francis Baringthought, that the right hon. Gentleman had not dealt quite fairly by Ministers on this occasion, by complaining that certain offices had not been included in the returns which were upon the Table, although he knew, or ought to have known, that it was the practice never to include them in such returns. The right hon. Gentleman, without saying so in express terms, had left it to be inferred that it was an extremely convenient mode of exercising patronage for Government to make appointments to situations which were not brought under the consideration of Parliament. The right hon. Gentleman knew that the returns upon the Table had been drawn up in conformity with the practice which had existed for upwards of twenty years; and, therefore, in the imputations which he had conveyed on that account he had exhibited a spirit of political charity different from that which he had expected from the
490
right hon. Gentleman. He begged to ask the right hon. Gentleman, and he was tempted to do so only on account of the tone of his observations, whether the Commission at the head of which was the right hon. Gentleman's own brother, was named in the returns? He admitted, that the Commission to which he had alluded had done its duty to the complete satisfaction of the public, and he referred to it only with the view of showing that the fact of certain offices not being included in the returns was not attributable to any improper motive, but solely to the cause which he had stated, namely, conformity to the uniform practice. The right hon. Gentleman had also fallen into another mistake—so he supposed he must call it—he had taken the returns made under the Act of Parliament, and said, "These show so many offices to be abolished, but here are other returns which exhibit so many offices created, and the balance against the public is so much." If this statement had proceeded from any other gentleman, he should not have been surprised at it; but he must confess, that coming as it did from the right hon. Gentleman, and recollecting the department in the Government over which he once presided, it had extremely astonished him that he should have forgotten that there were many offices abolished which were not included in the returns. He could state from his own knowledge, that by a Bill brought in last year, which former Administrations had been haggling about for seven years, no fewer than thirty offices were abolished, which had not been included in the returns, because it was not usual to do so under the Act of Parliament. He was now alluding to offices not familiar to the uninstructed ear, such as the Clerk of the Pipe. The right hon. Gentleman had made some strong observations with respect to the number of commissions of inquiry which had been appointed by the present Government; but had he pointed out any one commission which could be considered useless or unnecessary? Was there any one subject upon which a Commission had been appointed with respect to which the House had a right to say, that it was not desirable that an inquiry should take place? Let him ask the House whose fault it was that had rendered it necessary to institute all these inquiries into monopolies and abuses? If the right hon. Gentleman's friends, who

491
had been in office for about fifty years, had during that time applied the process of reform to the institutions of the country, they would not now have to complain that so many points remained for the present Ministers to inquire into. In many instances, Ministers had actually been forced to issue commissions by the urgent representations of Committees of the House, and, therefore, the House must participate equally with the Government in the censure which the right hon. Gentleman had bestowed on the appointment of commissions; but, for his own part, he thought no blame could fairly be said to attach to either upon that ground. The right hon. Gentleman had detailed to the House the number of appointments which had been made by the present Government, stating that they were made to suit all fancies and sizes, from the small clerk up to the great gentleman. Now, he would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, from the experience which he had had of patronage whilst in office, it did not make a great difference to the parties who obtained offices if they were temporary instead of permanent? Following up that question by another, he would ask how many of the appointments to which the right hon. Gentleman had alluded were permanent, and how many temporary. The right hon. Gentleman having made it a matter of accusation that the present Government had created a large number of offices, he (Mr. Baring) would state a few facts, which could be verified by the papers upon the Table, to show what had really been clone by the present Ministers since they had been in office. The House might remember, that just before the present Ministers came into office, the right hon. Baronet, then member for Cumberland (Sir James Graham), moved for a return of the number of persons holding offices, who were then in the receipt of salaries or emoluments of above 1,000 l. a-year; and last Session a paper was laid upon the Table of the House which showed how those persons had been affected by the reductions made during the time the present Ministers had been in power. It would appear from these returns, that Ministers, to use the metaphor of the right hon. Baronet, had not aimed at the small birds, whilst they suffered the great birds of prey to escape. Perhaps it would be satisfactory
492
to the right hon. Gentleman to compare what had been done in the way of reduction during the time he was in office, and during the time that the present Government had been in power. He found, that in 1828, 1829, 1830, when the right hon. Gentleman was in office, the number of offices abolished was 909, and that the salaries and emoluments attached to them amounted to 136,177 l. During the three years in which the present Ministers held office, the number of offices abolished amounted to 1,858, having salaries attached to them amounting to 259,230 l. To put the matter in a clearer light, he might state, that during the former period, the average annual reduction was 35,392 l., and during the latter it was 86,400 l. In the former period, also the average annual reduction of offices was 303, and in the latter 450. Lest the right hon. Gentleman, with that candour which characterized his whole speech, should insinuate that Ministers had aimed at the small birds, whilst they had allowed the great ones to escape, he would state that, comparing the two periods again, the average annual amount of the salaries of the offices abolished in the former was 117 l., and in the latter 190 l. The right hon. Gentleman had made no attack upon Government with respect to the years 1831 and 1832, but had confined all his remarks to 1833. He did not mean to say, that the right hon. Gentleman had actually stated, that in the last year, the Government was less attentive to the public interests than in the other two years; but, from the whole tenour of the speech, that was the impression which must have been produced on the minds of his hearers. He would, therefore, state the reductions which had been made in the department of stamps and taxes, with which he was better acquainted than any other. The average annual reduction in this office in the years 1831, 1832, and 1833, was 17,242 l., and in the last six months, since the termination of 1833, it was 13,037 l.; being not much below the average annual reduction during the three preceding years.
Mr. Humeexpressed his surprise, that Ministers should be at all angry with the right hon. Gentleman for bringing this subject forward. For his part, he approved of the course which the right hon. Gentleman had pursued, and entertained hopes that after he had been two or three

493
years in opposition he would become quite a reformer. It was a true observation, "When rogues fall out, honest men get their own," and so when Whigs and Tories quarrelled, one party being in office, and the other out, it was sure to tend to the public advantage. The hon. Member, after expressing an opinion that returns of all temporary offices ought to be laid before Parliament, observed, that in the papers upon the Table, he saw no mention of Mr. Macaulay's appointment in India, which he considered a most abominable one—he meant as regarded the salary of 10,000 l. a-year.
Sir Robert Peelthought, that his right hon. friend was perfectly justified in calling public attention to this subject. No person who saw from the papers upon the Table that seventy-four clerks, and thirty-two assistant barristers had been appointed for the purpose of superintending the distribution of a million of money could have avoided feeling that it was a fit subject for inquiry. Here were seventy-four clerks with salaries of 100 l. a-year, and thirty-two assistant barristers, together with forty others having salaries of five guineas a day, to superintend the distribution of 1,000,000 l. ! Was not this a circumstance which required explanation, and would it not have been a positive neglect of duty if, after having moved for the papers which furnished the information of the fact, his right hon. friend had not called the attention of the House to the subject? His right hon. friend, the Secretary for Ireland, had stated, that though from the arrangement which had been made to facilitate the settlement of the claims arising out of the grant, a large expenditure was taking place at the present moment, it was not greater than was absolutely necessary, nor than must ultimately have been made. For his own part, he thought that the business might have been transacted by the establishment in Dublin, aided by a few additional clerks; but if the public would be subjected to no greater charge one way than another, and if the persons who held temporary appointments would not be allowed to put forward any claim to subsequent remuneration on that account, he did not object to the proceeding. It was fitting, that Government should have had an opportunity of offering an explanation; and he was never more surprised than he had been that evening at witnessing the dissatisfaction evinced by a reformed
494
House of Commons, not because gross and corrupt appointments had taken place, but because one of its Members felt it his duty to call for an explanation of a circumstance which wore a character of suspicion. There was nothing in the course which his right hon. friend had pursued as Chancellor of the Exchequer which made it inconsistent in him to urge economy upon the Government. Whilst his right hon. friend was in office, he established a progressive system of economy; and had he remained in power, the system which he commenced he would have continued. As to reductions, it was notorious that they had been carried to a great extent by the Governments which preceded the present. Indeed he had heard more than one of the present Ministers declare, that they were only gleaners in the field which vigorous hands had reaped before them. A word with respect to Commissions. He perfectly concurred with his right hon. friend in thinking it was necessary that the attention of the House should be steadily directed towards them. He did not believe, that they were appointed from corrupt motives, but it could not be denied, that they had thrown great patronage into the hands of the Government. That was a fact. It was true, that many of the Commissions had originated with Committees of the House, as happened the other day with respect to a Committee of which he was Chairman, and which recommended the appointment of a Commission to inquire into the salaries of officers connected with the local Administration of Justice. He could not agree with the hon. Member opposite, that appointments which were of a temporary nature were not valuable. He hoped that the hon. member for Tiverton would persevere in the Motion of which he had given notice for next Session, relative to the practice of appointing Commissions. No doubt that in some cases—for instance, where local inquiries were necessary—the appointment of Commissioners was desirable; but it was so easy to appoint Commissioners to prosecute inquiries which the Members of that House ought to perform themselves, and without doing which they could not satisfactorily discuss the measures founded upon them, that the practice of having recourse to Commissions ought to be regarded with the utmost jealousy. He apprehended that the appointment of Commissioners offered a

495
temptation to Members to escape from the discharge of onerous duties. If it were true, that 104 offices had been bestowed upon gentlemen at the bar in one year, it was impossible to deny that the Government must be able to exercise considerable influence over the profession from which they were selected. So far from being induced to blame his right hon. friend for the course which he had pursued upon this occasion, if he were a member of the Government, he would have thanked his right hon. friend for affording them an opportunity for explanation on the subject to which he had directed attention, while, as a Member of the House, he participated in the justifiable and natural jealousy which his right hon. friend felt.
Mr. Secretary Ricethought, that Government had no right to complain of the result of the present discussion, whatever might be thought of the tone of the speech in which it had originated. The inference which was to be drawn from the observations of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Goulburn) was, that the conduct of Government was characterized by disingenuousness and mystification; but the clear and satisfactory statement of his hon. friend (Mr. F. Baring) had set the House right upon that point. With respect to the appointment of Commissions, the House should recollect that the practice had been pursued by former Administrations. It appeared from a return laid upon the Table in 1827, that from 1307 to 1829, no less a sum than 956,885 l. had been expended on Commissions. In one year alone, during this period, 89,000 l. were granted for the expense of Commissions. The right hon. Gentleman contended, that Commissions were of the greatest use for the purpose of collecting information upon which the House could legislate, and said that they never could have discussed the Poor-law Amendment Bill without having the reports of the Commissioners before them. With respect to Mr. Macaulay's salary, it was fixed by Act of Parliament.
Mr. Sheilsaid, as Mr. Macaulay's salary was fixed by Act of Parliament, it might be reduced by the same authority. He believed, that the Irish Corporation Commission had been very properly appointed, but although that Commission had completed its labours, no report whatever had yet been produced. As to the Irish Church Commission, if an efficient Tithe Bill had
496
been introduced by the noble Lord in 1832, the million of money which had been voted to the clergy, and all the expenses of its distribution, would have been saved to the country. He regretted, however, that economy had been too much attended to in the arrangements regarding the Public Instruction Commission; indeed, it was impossible, unless some addition were made to its numbers, that it should be at all effectual. He wished to know whether it was in contemplation to augment that Commission?
Mr. Littletonsaid, the subject was under the consideration of Government, and he had every reason to think, that the number of Commissioners would be increased.
Mr. Groteexpressed his approbation of the course which Government had pursued in the appointment of various Commissions. Economy no doubt should be attended to; but there was no portion of the expenditure of the country to which he felt so little objection as that employed in obtaining the most useful and valuable information communicated to the public by means of these Commissions of Inquiry. The hon. Member particularly alluded to the various law Commissions, but more especially to the Poor-law Commission, which contained so much important and excellent information. He did not coincide with the right hon. Secretary with regard to the salary given to Mr. Macaulay, which, with all his admiration for that excellent and most gifted individual, he could not but consider extravagant.
Mr. Cobbettaltogether disagreed with the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down as to the propriety of appointing so many Commissions. If it were necessary before Parliament legislated on any subject, to have a Commission appointed, deliberation would very soon be altogether superseded. The Ministers selected the Commissioners who thought with them on the particular subject in question, and in making their report very good care was taken, that it should not be disagreeable to their employers. It was impossible to deny that great disadvantage was felt in reference to the Poor-laws in consequence of the manner in which the Reports had been got up and submitted to Parliament. It had been said, that the Report contained the deliberate, well-studied, and clear made-up opinions of

497
the Commissioners, and that no equal to it had ever issued from the Press. He believed that was correct. Its match never had issued, and he hoped never would issue from the Press. But the fact was, the House had passed the Bill without even having read the Reports. These voluminous Reports which they had prepared, and the expense of printing which amounted to 60,000 l., had not been laid on the Table till after the Bill had been read a second time, and part of them not till after it had gone through Committee. There were some parts of those Reports which be was quite sure the noble Lord (Lord Althorp) had never himself read, he repeated he was sure the noble Lord had never read them, because one volume contained no fewer than seventy distinct libels upon him (Mr. Cobbett) personally; and if the noble Lord had read them, no doubt he would have taken care that an hon. Member of that House should not have been so improperly alluded to. Something, he thought, ought to be done in order to prevent his Majesty's subjects from being libelled in the grossest manner through the papers ordered to be printed by that House. Lord Kenyon, he believed, had laid it down as a rule that nothing should be deemed a libel which was contained in any publication or republication of what was printed under the order of the Houses of Parliament. He could not, for example, indict any one, he could not indict the noble Lord (Lord Althorp), without the sanction of the House. The Beer Bill Reports of last year contained gross libels on many individuals. He recollected that in one instance they held up a woman as an adultress, and a man as an adulterer, giving both names and their place of residence. That he thought was most improper. The Committee on petitions, he was glad to observe, had been in the habit of pursuing a very different course, taking care where there was libellous matter in petitions, that all names should be omitted. As to the Report on the Poor-laws, he thought it his duty to say, that of 1717 Magistrates, only 159 agreed with the Commissioners in the opinions which they had stated. The Commission altogether had been a hired falsehood-retailing body of men, and their production was full of lies from beginning to end.
Mr. Shawsaid, he had opposed from
498
the very first the grant of 1,000,000 l., to the Irish clergy, because he was sure it would ultimately do more harm than good. That grant had been occasioned, not by the difficulty of collecting tithes, but in consequence of the noble Lord's own declaration at the beginning of last Session, and Government finding themselves placed in a difficult situation, could not extricate themselves except by putting their hands into the public purse. They had now been shifting, juggling, and trifling with respect to the Tithe Bill, but no effectual step had yet been taken towards its satisfactory adjustment, and he very much feared they were now about to adopt the same vulgar means of getting out of their difficulties. He hoped, if a proposition to that effect were brought forward, the House would at once resist it.
The Attorney Generalstated, in answer to an observation made by the hon. member for Oldham, that Lord Kenyon had never laid down the law as had been stated; he merely refused to interfere by way of criminal information, leaving the parties open to adopt any other mode of proceeding, civil or criminal.
The House resolved itself into a Committee of Ways and Means.

THE BUDGET.
Lord Althorprose to lay before the Committee not merely the general state of the finances of the country, but also the prospects of improvement which he thought he might fairly anticipate, and the means by which he expected to arrive at that favourable result. He was unwilling to detain them by any general preliminary remarks, and would therefore at once proceed to the question, referring only as he proceeded to such facts and principles as might be necessary to explain and vindicate the financial propositions which he should have to bring under the consideration of the Committee. He would begin by stating what was the amount of the income and comparative expenditure of the year ending the 5th of July.

£

The receipt of the year ending 5th of July, 1834, amounted to

46,914,586

And the expenditure to

44,737,556

leaving a surplus of income over expenditure of

2,177,030

The Committee would be aware, that this gave a statement of a surplus of income over the expenditure larger than any he had

499
ever before had the satisfaction of announcing. Comparing that with the similar period of last year.

£

The surplus of income over expenditure, in the year ending the 5th of July, 1833, was

1,501,933

And, as he had stated, the surplus up to the 5th of July, 1834, amounted to

2,177,030

The improvement in the surplus during the present year had been

675,000

The receipts of this year were

46,914,586

And the receipts of last year

46,895,007

So that, if anything, the receipts of the present year had increased beyond the receipts of last year, notwithstanding, as was well known during this period a reduction of taxation had taken place to the amount of 1,500,000 l. The other part of the improvement depended on a diminution of the expenditure, which had been effected to the extent of 650,000 l. He confessed he regarded this as a most satisfactory statement to make as regarded the finances of the country, because it proved beyond the possibility of doubt that there was an elasticity in the system, which, notwithstanding large reductions in taxation, preserved the revenue of the State undiminished in its amount. Having made this comparative statement of the previous and present condition of the revenue, he would next apply himself to the question,—what they had to provide for during this year? The charge on the Consolidated Fund during the present year ending April, 1835, was estimated at 30,500,000 l. The supplies had all been voted, except part of the miscellaneous estimates, and amounted to—

£

For the army

6,497,903

Navy

4,578,009

Ordnance

1,166,914

Miscellaneous

2,228,387

£

Making in the whole

14,471,213

What they had therefore to provide for was:

— For the Consolidated Fund

30,500,000

And for Supplies

14,471,213

£

Making a total of

44,971,213

The supplies for 1834 were

14,620,487

For 1835

14,471,213

£

exhibiting a diminution in supplies for 1835 of

149,274

Now, probably, the Committee would recollect, that when he had made a summary financial statement at the commence-
500
ment of the Session, he had mentioned his expectation that there would be a diminution in the votes of supply, which would amount to 500,000 l.; it was necessary, therefore, that he should here enter into some explanation, in order to account for there being now an actual diminution of no more than 149,274 l. This was to be accounted for by certain sums having arisen which could not at that time be taken into the account, and a considerable portion of which had not then been even contemplated. The first payment to which he referred was 125,000 l. to the East India Company, and which occurred, it would be recollected, in consequence of an arrangement made under an Act passed during the last Session of Parliament. The next item arose in consequence of the expenses of governing the island of St. Helena being taken into the hands of Government. The scale, he regretted to say, this year was necessarily that of the East India Company; it amounted to no less a sum than 99,000 l., which he could not but consider a most extravagant charge; but he was ready to pledge himself, from what he knew of his right hon. friend (Mr. Spring Rice), that next year its expense would be reduced to a much more economical scale. The Committee would also recollect, that a sum of 60,000 l. had been voted as a gratuity to those who had been engaged in the battle of Navarino, and 20,000 l. had beers proposed for the purpose of making an experiment, in order to facilitate steam navigation to China. Besides all this, there was a vote of 100,000 l. which had very properly been proposed by his right hon. friend the late First Lord of the Admiralty for pay to the navy immediately, anticipating, instead of deferring the payment for a considerable period. In addition to this, there would be two estimates of a small amount, which would be laid on the table of the House within a very few days—one of 1,300 l. for the purchase of some fossil remains for the British Museum, and the other of 7,000 l. for the establishment of a prison at Dartmouth, in order to make some experiments in connexion with the important subject of secondary punishments. Those items, in the whole, amounted to 412,310 l., which the Committee would perceive more than accounted for the difference in what he had stated would probably be the diminution in supplies for the present, as compared with the last

501
year [An Hon. Member: The grant to Captain Ross.] That was included in the miscellaneous estimates; it was no additional separate charge. ["The Danish claims."] The Danish claims could not be voted this year; they must, first of all, be properly investigated. ["The vote in favour of the Poles."] That was also included in the miscellaneous estimates. He hoped the Committee would take this as a pretty substantial proof that he was rather disposed to understate than to magnify the diminution in expenditure which had actually taken place. He had gone into those details for the purpose of showing that he had not made, on the occasion alluded to, so extravagantly erroneous an estimate, when he mentioned the probable saving of 500,000 l.; in point of fact, it would have been, but for the payments he had alluded to, 661,584 l. The charge they had to provide for, then, was 41,971,213 l. He would state the probable amount of the income as if no alterations had been made. He saw no reason to expect that a diminution of taxation would occasion any falling off in the revenue, and, therefore, he might state the amount to meet the charge, (taking the year ending. April 5), to be 45,914,586 l., which would leave a balance, consequently, of 1,943,600 l. The charge last year was 44,920,000 l., and the expenditure 44,646,620 l., so that there was a saving, up to the 5th of April, of 273,380 l. on the estimates; and when he compared the income of last year with the estimates and charge, it reduced the surplus to 1,913,600 l. But then there would be great alterations this year; for, besides the great reduction there would be in taxation, a large sum must be provided for, as an increase of expenditure during the year. Thus there was the interest of the money to be granted to the West-India proprietors, which might be calculated at 750,000 l. It would not require to be paid till next spring; the first portion of it could not be called for before April; but the Committee were probably aware that, as the money was to bear interest from the first of August next, they were bound to provide for it in the expenditure of the year. This would raise the charge to 45,721,000 l.; so that, as compared with the income of last year, the amount of the surplus would be only 1,200,000 l. To this, however, there would be added 120,000 l., to be received from the Bank
502
of England, and 50,000 l., which would be the amount saved by the reduction of the Four-per-Cents. There was another item which was also to be taken into consideration. He might be told, that he was calculating on that of which he had no experience, and that, therefore, he was liable to make mistakes. On a former occasion, however, he thought he had considerably overrated the difficulty—he alluded to the increased revenue to be derived from the new duties on tea, which, after the best information he could obtain, and after much reflection on the matter, he calculated would amount to 250,000 l. He felt confident that, under the new system, the vast competition which must exist would reduce the price of tea; and he had every reason, at the same time, to believe would increase the consumption of that article. With that view of the case, he certainly did not think that he was much overrating what would be the increase in that particular department, when he rated it at 250,000 l. Deducting these sums from the charge, the surplus would be increased to 1,620,000 l., as follows:—

Original surplus

1,200,000

Bank

120,000

Four-per-Cents

50,000

Tea

250,000

Surplus

£1,620,000

It might here be proper for him to state, with reference to the sum to be received from the Bank, that though he had not entirely, he should rather say, formally, concluded any arrangement with the Bank of England for the re-payment of one-fourth of their capital, which must be paid before the 5th October next, yet it was in so forward a state of progress, that he thought the effect of it would be not to reduce the surplus more than 1,200 l. a-year. He now wished to call the attention of the House to the consideration of some particular duties. During the course of this Session and the last, great complaints had been made of the increase in the consumption of spirits, and in the number of persons habitually drinking raw spirits, as well as the great increase of shops and establishments splendidly furnished for the purpose of selling spirits. He regretted the evil; but it was not his intention to propose any increase in the duties on spirits. Any Gentleman who had attended to questions of finance,

503
must well know, that increasing the duty on spirits would do no good whatever either in the shape of increasing the revenue or of diminishing their consumption. He was not one of that school who imagined they could produce morality by taxation. But when it was practicable, when a case presented itself to him in which an increase might be made to the revenue without, at the same time, increasing immorality, that was a case on which he might most justifiably act. It was perfectly well known, for the knowledge was the result of many experiments on the subject, that increase of duty on spirits was not always calculated to produce an increase of revenue; as that increase operated powerfully in the encouragement of illicit distillation and smuggling. But with respect to the duty on licenses for the sale of spirits, he believed that the House would agree with him, that those licenses would bear an increase of duty, which increase of duty would not be liable to be attended by the same results as an increase in the duty on spirits themselves. What was the state of the law at present with respect to the duty on these licenses? There were three classes of those duties; the first class was that of wholesale dealers not allowed to sell less than two gallons, or to sell it for consumption on the premises; the second class was that of the retailers depending on Magistrates' licenses, and varying according to value of house from two guineas to ten guineas; the third class, which was peculiar to Ireland, consisted of licenses to persons previously licensed to sell groceries. He did not mean to touch either the first or the last of those classes, as he did not think that either of them could well bear an increase of duty. But on the third class, consisting of retail spirit dealers, an additional duty might, he was persuaded, be levied without disadvantage, if not, indeed, with great benefit to the public. If the effect of such an increase in the duty on spirit licenses of retail dealers were to reduce the number of public-houses, which he scarcely thought would be the case, the diminution of revenue thereby occasioned would be amply compensated by public advantages of another description. After some consideration, it appeared to him that licenses for the retailing of spirits in England would well bear an increase of fifty per cent. The effect of this additional duty would
504
be to increase the revenue by 160,000 l.; the amount of revenue derived from the duty on retail spirit licenses being, at present, 335,344 l., viz.:—

No. of Licenses,

38,500

At £2

2

£80,849

No. of Licenses,

26,205

4

4

110,061

No. of Licenses,

3,700

6

6

23,309

No. of Licenses,

2,154

7

7

15,831

No. of Licenses,

3,879

8

8

32,583

No. of Licenses,

2,472

9

9

23,361

No. of Licenses,

4,700

10

10

49,350

81,610

£335,344

It was also his intention to propose another alteration of duty on licenses, in which he hoped, that he should again meet with the concurrence of the House. He meant to propose making a difference in the duty on the licenses to those beer-houses in which the beer was drunk on the premises, and the duty on the licenses to those beer-houses in which the beer was not drunk on the premises. At present the duty on licenses to all beer-houses was two guineas. It was his intention to raise the duty on licenses to those beer-houses in which the beer was drunk on the premises to three guineas, and to reduce the duty on licenses to those beer-houses in which the beer was not drunk on the premises to one guinea. The number of licenses granted to beer-shops was at present 34,976, producing a revenue of 73,450 l. From the change which he had stated he meant to propose in the duty on these licenses, he expected that the revenue would derive an increase of 35,000 l.; it being highly probable that the reduction of the duty to one guinea on the licenses fur selling beer not to be drunk on the premises, would induce many persons to take out licenses of that description; while, on the other hand, the increase of the guinea in the duty on licenses for selling beer to be drunk on the premises was not likely very much to diminish the number of licenses issued for that purpose. The effect of the propositions which he had stated, namely, the increase of the duty on the licenses for retailing spirits, and the variation of the duty on the licenses for selling beer would be according to his calculation to increase the surplus revenue to 1,815,000 l., viz.

Present surplus

£.1,620,000

Spirits

160,000

Beer

35,000

£1,815,000

505
He next came to speak of the reductions of taxation, which he had already proposed, and of those which he was about to propose. The first, and by much the largest of these, was the reduction which he had already proposed of the House-tax, amounting to 1,200,000 l. There was then the measure known by the name of the Customs' Bill, which had been brought in by his right hon. friend, the President of the Board of Trade, and which contained a number of reductions of duty on various imported articles, chiefly used in our manufactures, into the details of which it was unnecessary for him then to enter; but the whole amount of which he might state at about 200,000 l. The revenue arising from the duty on starch had fallen off very considerably, for although it was an article in considerable use in our manufactures, yet the duty was subject to very considerable drawbacks, and a quantity of potato starch, which was not subject to duty, was made, and answered all the purposes of the genuine starch. By relinquishing the duty on starch, which it was his intention to propose, the revenue would lose about 75,000 l. Another duty which he meant to repeal was, the duty on stone-bottles and sweets, the produce of which was 6,000 l. He came next to the assessed-taxes. The duties which he proposed to repeal were as follows, viz.:—

Rate of Duty

Estimated Loss by Repeal.

£.

s.

d.

£.

On windows in farm-houses, occupied by tenants under 200 l. a-year, or by owners under 100 l. a-year, and not having an income exceeding 100 l. a-year from any other source

35,000

On husbandry horses, used occasionally for riding, or drawing untaxed carriages, by tenants of farms under 500 l. a-year, or owners being the occupiers of farms under 250 l. a-year, and not having an income exceeding 100 l. a-year from any other source. The present exemption only extends to farmers exceeding 200 l. a-year, and having no other source of income but their farms

1

8

9

10,000

On husbandry horses, used occasionally for other purposes, or let occasionally to hire. Husbandry horses are exempt, but are liable to a duty of 10 s. 6d., if used in drawing coal, gravel, &c.; or if occasionally let for hire

0

10

6

2,000

506

On horses used by bailiffs, shepherds, or herdsmen

1

8

9

2,000

On shepherds and herdsmen's dogs

0

8

0

3,000

On male servants, under eighteen years of age, provided they have a legal settlement in the parish where hired

1

4

0

20,000

On one riding-horse, kept by clergymen, or Dissenting or Catholic ministers, whose incomes are under 120 l. per annum. At present the exemption is confined to clergymen of the Established Church, with an income not exceeding 60 l.

1

8

9

3,000

The Bachelors'-duty (additional 20 s.) on male servants kept by Roman Catholic clergymen

1

0

0

100

On post-horses used occasionsionally by licensed postmasters in husbandry, and for drawing manure, fuel, &c. An innkeeper is liable to a duty of 10 s. 6d. if he use a post-horse occasionally in drawing coals, hay, or corn, for his own use

0

10

6

75,100

Another reduction which he intended to propose, was not comprehended in assessed-taxes, but belonged to the Stamp-duties. It was a small duty, but it was one which produced a great deal of irritation and violation of the law. He alluded to the duty on almanacks, which in England was ls. 3d. each, and in Ireland 9d. and 6d. each, producing a revenue of 25,000 l. The whole amount of taxation which he proposed to reduce would be 1,581,000 l. viz.:—

House Tax

£.1,200,000

Customs Bill

200,000

Starch

75,000

Stone bottles and sweets

6,000

Assessed Taxes

75,000

Almanacks

25,000

£.1,581,000

He had already stated, that the present surplus, with the addition of the increased revenue from the augmented duty on spirit and beer licenses, was 1,815,000 l. Deducting from that sum the whole amount of taxes reduced, viz. 1,581,000 l., the effect would be to leave a surplus of 235,000 l. He had, however, stated this account in a most unfavourable manner for himself. He had included in the charge 400,000 l., which was applicable to the present year only; and, therefore, if he stated, as the result of the permanent balance, that it would leave a surplus of 600,000 l., he believed he should under-

507
state its amount. But looking to the present year only, there would be saved nearly half the interest on the West-India grant, say 350,000 l., and there would only be to be deducted from the receipts half the House-tax, or 600,000 l., making together 950,000 l. The balance, therefore, to be calculated upon for the present year amounted to 1,185,000 l. With this surplus the country was, he thought, in a state to try the experiment whether, in one important article of revenue, we might not venture on a certain reduction of duty, with a fair expectation, that such reduction, by increasing the quantity produced of the article to which that duty referred, might eventually augment instead of diminish the public income. He had already stated, that however desirable it might be to make spirits an article of taxation, there was great danger that the effect of so doing would be to increase illicit distillation, and to give encouragement to smuggling. This was a fact which the history of the duty on spirits proved in a most instructive manner. He would briefly state to the House the effect which had, at various times, been produced by changes in the duty on spirits in England, in Scotland, and in Ireland, separately, in order that they might be better able to judge whether the proposition, which it was his intention to submit to them on the subject, deserved their approbation. The rate of duty on spirits for home consumption in England, previous to the year 1827, was 11 s. 9¼14 d. the imperial gallon. The average quantity of spirits brought to charge during the last three years of the old law was 3,959,990 gallons. The duty was then reduced to 7s. 6d. the imperial gallon; and, in the year immediately following, the quantity of spirits brought to charge rose to 7,407,204 gallons. In the subsequent years, the duty remaining at 7s. 6d. the imperial gallon, the quantity of spirits brought to charge was as follows, viz:—

In 1828

6,671,562

1829

7,759,687

1830

7,700,766

1831

7,732,101

1832

7,434,047

1833

7,281,900

1834

7,717,303

It thus appeared, that the effect of lowering the duty in England had been to double the quantity of spirits brought to charge. In Scotland, previously to the year 1825, the rate of duty on spirits for
508
home consumption was 6s. 2d. the imperial gallon. The average quantity of spirits brought to charge in Scotland, in the three last years of the old law, was 2,158,200 imperial gallons. The duty was reduced to 2s. 4¾d. a gallon. The consequence was that, in the year ending 5th January, 1825, the quantity of spirits brought to charge rose to 4,334,222 gallons, and in the year 1826 to 5,980,941 gallons. In the year 1827, the duty was increased from 2s. 4¾d. to 2s. 10 d., and the consequence was, that the quantity of spirits brought to charge in that year fell from 5,980,941 gallons to 3,988,788 gallons; thus showing the extraordinary influence of an augmentation of duty. In 1828 the amount brought to charge recovered a little, it being 4,752,136 gallons. In 1829, it was 5,695,743 gallons. In 1830, it was 5,756,951 gallons. In 1831, during the latter part of which year the duty was increased from 2s. 10 d., to 3s. 4d, the amount brought to charge was 5,992,421 gallons. The duty remained at 3s. 4d., and the amount of spirits brought to charge in Scotland in the subsequent years was as follows, viz.:—

Gals.

s.

d.

1832

5,691,096

3

4

1833

5,401,651

3

4

1834

5,982,920

3

4

Year ending5th April,1834

6,112,659

3

4

Half-year ending 5th April, 1834

3,257,856

3

4

He had stated these details in order to prove that the quantity of spirits brought to charge in Scotland had gradually increased up to the present time, and that there was every indication that it would go on increasing. He now came to Ireland; and here the effect that had been produced by the alterations which had taken place in the rate of duty on spirits was very remarkable. Previous to the year 1825, the rate of duty on spirits in Ireland for home consumption was 5s. 7¼d. the imperial gallon. The average amount of the quantity of spirits brought to charge in Ireland during the last three years of the old Distillery-law was 3,173,948 gallons. When the duty was reduced to 2s. 4¾d.a gallon, the quantity of spirits brought to charge in the year ending 5th January, 1825, rose to 6,690,313 gallons. In 1826 it rose still further, to 9,262,742 gallons. In 1827, the duty was increased to 2s. 10 d., and the quantity of spirits brought to charge immediately fell to 6,834,866 gallons. In the year 1828,

509
the quantity was 8,260,663 gallons; in 1829, the quantity was 9,937,633 gallons; and in 1830, the quantity was 9,212,222 gallons. The duty was then raised to 3s. 4d. a gallon, and the consequence was, that the amount of spirits brought to charge in Ireland fell, in 1831, to 8,981,595 gallons; in 1832, to 8,635,081 gallons; in 1833, to 8,594,331 gallons; and, in 1834, to 8,136,281 gallons. From this it appeared that, since the increase of duty to 3s. 4d. a gallon, the quantity of spirits brought to charge in Ireland had been gradually diminishing. But although the quantity of spirits brought to charge in Ireland amounted at present to little more than 8,000,000 of gallons, there was no doubt whatever that the quantity of spirits actually consumed in Ireland amounted to from 12,000,000to14,000,000 annually. Such being the case, his Majesty's Government had felt it their duty to take the subject into their serious consideration, with a view to ascertain whether it might not be advisable, by a diminution of the duty, to prevent illicit distillation, and, at the same time, not to expose the revenue to the danger of much loss. It was clear that, in Ireland, the effect of the duty of 3s. 4d. had been the continual diminution in the quantity of spirits brought to charge; proving, together with the increase of illicit distillation, that the taxation of spirits had considerably passed the limit of productiveness. Under these circumstances it had been thought right, in this year, when there was a large surplus revenue which would allow the experiment to be made, to propose a considerable reduction in the duty on spirits for home consumption in Ireland. He felt confident that, by reducing the duty to the amount of 1s.—that was, by reducing it from 3s. 4d. a gallon to 2s. 4d. a gallon, very advantageous results would be obtained. The effect which he anticipated from the reduction of duty was, that the amount of spirits brought to charge in Ireland would rise at once from 8,000,000 to 10,000,000 of gallons. If so, the loss to the revenue, in the present year, would not exceed 200,000 l.; and he was confident, that the increase of spirits brought to charge in Ireland, in future years, in consequence of the reduction of duty, would be such, that the revenue would suffer no diminution whatever. This was what he contemplated in an earlier part of this Session, when he stated to
510
the hon. and learned member for Dublin, that he hoped to be able to bring forward a measure which might diminish the taxation in Ireland, without material injury to our financial condition. He was aware it might be objected to the present proposition that there would be an obvious inconvenience in making so marked a difference between the spirit duties of Scotland and Ireland, and that the consequence might be extensive smuggling. All he had to say in reply to that was this, that if a serious extent of smuggling was found to prevail, Government would have recourse to all the means within its power to prevent practices so injurious to our commerce and to the morals of the country, and if the ordinary means at the disposal of the Executive were not found sufficient for such a purpose, no doubt an assimilation of the duties would be rendered necessary. At the same time, he felt bound to acknowledge that he should have recourse to such an arrangement with the greatest reluctance, for he apprehended that its immediate operation would be to produce a very serious amount of smuggling over the border. On these points he acknowledged it would not be in his power to speak definitively as regarded future years, but for the present he had, after the maturest consideration, resolved to establish a difference between the spirit duties of Scotland and Ireland; and he was the more strengthened in this resolution, when he recollected that it would require him to relinquish 440,000 l. per annum before he could bring both duties to a condition of equality. It was evident, also, from the statement which he had already made, that under the present rate of duty, the quantity of spirits brought to charge in Scotland was annually increasing, while, under the present rate of duty, the quantity of spirits brought to charge in Ireland was annually diminishing. He was justified, therefore, in applying to Ireland a measure which he should not be justified in applying to Scotland. Having now laid this statement before the House, it only remained for him to advert again to the small surplus which he permitted to remain—a surplus little more than 200,000 l. No man was more ready to acknowledge than himself how extremely small such a surplus was, considering the pressing exigencies to which a great empire like this must occasionally be sub-

511
ject, and he should regard it as wholly inadequate if he did not entertain the greatest confidence in the elasticity of the resources of the country. If he were increasing taxation instead of diminishing it, it might be dangerous to leave so small a sum as that which he had mentioned; but as it was, he did not apprehend any danger whatever. Let the balance-sheet of 1831 be compared with the balance of July, 1834, they were as follows, viz:—

January, 1831.—Receipts

£50,056,616

Payments

47,142,943

£2,913,673

July, 1834.—Receipts

£46,914,586

Payments

44,737,556

£2,177,030

The present surplus, therefore, was only 740,000 l. less than it was in 1831; but the amount of taxes reduced in the interval had been exclusively of those which he now proposed to reduce, upwards of 6,300,000 l. The reduction of the income had been only 3,000,000 l.; the reduction of the expenditure had been 2,405,387 l. When he looked at the official value of the exports from the United Kingdom for the three years 1828, 1829, and 1830, and compared them with those for the three years 1831, 1832, and 1833, he saw no reason to apprehend any danger on the score of diminished commerce. The return was as follows, viz.—

Years.

Produce of the United Kingdom.

Foreign and Colonial Merchandise.

Total Reports.

£

£

£

1828

52,797,000

9,946,000

62,744,000

1829

56,213,000

10,622,000

66,835,000

1830

61,140,000

8,550,000

69,691,000

3)170,150,000

3)29,118,000

3)199,270,000

Average

56,716,000

9,706,000

66,423,000

1831

60,683,000

10,745,000

71,429,000

1832

65,926,000

11,044,000

76,071,000

1833

69,989,000

9,833,000

79,823,000

3)195,698,000

3)31,622,000

3)227,323,000

Average

65,232,000

10,540,000

75,774,000

Increase on the average of the last three years as compared with the former three years

8,516,000

834,000

9,351,000

He felt, therefore, that he had a right to express confidence in the increasing commercial prosperity of the country. At the same time he admitted, that a great com-
512
mercial country was liable to fluctuations, which it was not always possible to anticipate, and that he should be wrong, therefore, if he himself entertained, or if he attempted to inspire the House with too sanguine expectations on the subject. Yet it would be difficult to refer to any very recent period of our history in which favourable anticipations could be more reasonably indulged, although, certainly, he must be considered a bold man who would presume to foretell that the prosperity in trade which now existed must continue long enough to complete the financial changes which he had just been developing to the House. At least, however, he was warranted in affirming that a more favourable opportunity for attempting reductions could scarcely be expected. Having brought his observations nearly to a close, he should just for a moment touch upon a great measure adopted by Parliament in the course of last year, and by which our financial condition would be materially affected both in the present and in future years—he alluded to the loan of 20,000,000 l. for the compensation of the West-India proprietors. It certainly must be considered a remarkable feature of the present year that provision would be made for payment of the interest of the money raised for that purpose, notwithstanding a considerable reduction in the amount of taxation, and notwithstanding the relief granted in a great variety of modes to the domestic trade, to the commerce of the country, and to the working classes. He repeated, that it would be all effected, notwithstanding the reduction of taxes. He could not in that place help observing, that the Act of the House by which they made provision for compensating the West-India proprietors must have been regarded throughout Europe with great surprise, and in fact it had excited amongst foreign nations sentiments of the strongest admiration at the justice and the charity which so nobly dictated such a sacrifice. It was an advance which only the greater nations of the continent could make or would think of making, even in circumstances of such extreme emergency as involved the national existence, and it added not a little to the astonishment and admiration which such an act was calculated to inspire, that it had been effected not only without breach of faith towards the parties interested, not only without imposing additional burthens upon the

513
people, but in conjunction with a diminution of those burthens. The fact was calculated not only to excite such sentiments as he had described, but must be highly gratifying to their feelings as Englishmen, especially when they remembered that the object thus accomplished was so great and beneficent. The noble Lord concluded by moving the following Resolution:—
"Resolved, That towards raising the Supply granted to his Majesty the sum of 14,384,700 l. be raised by Exchequer Bills for the service of the year 1834."
Mr. Baringwould not trouble the House with many observations, for there was not much of novelty in the statements of the noble Lord. As to the reductions of duty which the noble Lord had announced his intention of proposing, the only one which was of much importance was the reduction of the duty on spirits in Ireland. With respect to the general principles on which the financial system of the country was at present carried on, which was the most important part of the business, it was well known, that he materially differed from the noble Lord. He would not, however, repeat the opinions which he had expressed on that subject, knowing that they were unpopular in that House; but would merely observe, that it was mighty easy for a Finance Minister, year after year, to propose a reduction of taxation, and to talk of the buoyancy and elasticity of our finance system, and then to leave the country to all the chances of distress which might arise from some sudden and unexpected fluctuation. When the noble Lord said, that his predecessors in office left a large surplus or a larger margin, as it was termed, than he, all that the noble Lord did was to show that he was prepared to purchase popularity at a risk which other Finance Ministers, who, as public men, were more conscientious and scrupulous than the noble Lord, would not venture to incur. The noble Lord said, that he had a surplus of about 400,000 l. in the present year; but that the permanent surplus would be about 200,000 l. Now, to have only a surplus of 200,000 l. in a revenue of about 50,000,000 l. was, in fact, to have no surplus at all; for he was quite sure that the noble Lord, and those who advised the noble Lord on financial subjects, must be very clever indeed, if they could predict what would be the result of the financial operations of
514
any given year within the sum of 200,000 l. one way or the other. The increase or the decrease of the income of the country must of course depend, in a great measure, on the prosperity or the want of prosperity in the country. When the country was prosperous, consumption increased, and an increase of the revenue naturally followed; when the country was not prosperous, consumption decreased, and a decrease of the revenue as naturally followed. As long as manufactures and commerce went on tolerably well, and as long as the people were comfortable, the revenue would go on increasing. But these were matters subject to great fluctuations; sometimes going up hill, and sometimes going down hill with unexpected velocity; and some time or another the system of finance at present adopted, which not only left no surplus revenue, but actually anticipated an increase of revenue, would give way under those who trusted to it, and would leave the noble Lord, and those whose opinions were in conformity to the opinions of the noble Lord, in a condition which would not be one of exultation and triumph. To the reductions of duty amounting to 200,000 l., which it was proposed to effect by the Customs' Bill, he entertained great objections. Forming a part of the general reductions of the year, they ought to have been brought forward by the noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and not by the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade. Let them be proposed by whom they might, however, he must say, that he never knew 200,000 l. more deliberately thrown away, or reductions of taxation of so little importance. He was quite at a loss to understand the reason of reducing the duties on the importation of dried fruits, dried currants, &c. They were as much luxuries as any articles of consumption could well be. He could not divine why such articles were selected for a reduction of duty in preference to a thousand other articles on which a reduction might be more advantageously effected. Perhaps the proposition might be intended as a relief to the growers of fruits in the Ionian Islands. Their distress, however, arose from the competition of other parts of Greece. To the reductions on oil and starch he had no objection; but what had the noble Lord done for the substantial relief of agriculture and manufac-

515
tures? There was hardly an article of manufacture which would be relieved. The reduction of the duty on the export of coal was not only in itself a waste of money, but was attended with considerable danger. He doubted whether any one of the appropriations of the surplus was a judicious reduction of taxation, but this was the most injudicious of all; for, in the first place, it was a loss of revenue; and secondly, it was no benefit to the manufacturers, for it gave the foreign manufacturer an advantage against them. Although he (Mr. Baring) did not apprehend, as some did, the exhaustion of coal in the country, yet, when the coal got beyond the sea-coast it would be found to affect the price of the article, to the inconvenience of the community and of the manufacturer. If instead of hiding this proposed reduction in the Customs' Bill, it had been brought forward as an open and distinct proposition, he was persuaded that it would have been warmly opposed by the great body of manufacturers in the country, and among them by the right hon. Gentleman's constituents at Manchester. He (Mr. Baring) considered this reduction to be exceedingly injudicious, not only as getting rid uselessly of a large amount of public income, but as affording considerable encouragement to the manufactures of our continental rivals. To this reduction he entertained insuperable objections, not only as it might affect the poor, but on the ground that it would sooner or later strike a dreadful blow at the manufacturing power of the country. There was in the proposed alteration a positive and serious danger. The other reductions, with the exception he had mentioned, were foolish and unnecessary, and to consider them further, he looked upon as a mere waste of time. Then he must go to the statement just made by the noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and tell him that he had kept little of the promise he had made to relieve the landowners from the severe distress under which they were labouring. That distress the noble Lord had himself frequently acknowledged—Ministers proclaimed it in the King's Speech—the noble Lord had given frequent assurances of relief, and it now turned out that the boasted reductions were little paltry taxes on shepherds' dogs, on farmers' boys, and farmers' horses. In the whole list the noble
516
Lord could find no items but these to reduce—none which would effect any substantial relief. Could not the noble Lord have reduced the stamps on leases, and on the insurance of farm buildings and stock? He would have had no difficulty in finding a substitute for any amount of loss which the revenue might incur. He did not wish to raise a discussion on the subject of the Malt-tax—that great burthen upon the agriculturist; but he must observe to the noble Lord, that the sum of 1,500,000 l. which, on his own showing, he was able to apply to the relief of the country, would have afforded a reduction of 5s. on the Malt-tax, which by the substitution of other and far less impolitic imposts, might have been increased to 10 s. But the noble Lord preferred to yield to clamour, and repeal the House-taxes, for which, he doubted not, now they had got it, the shopkeepers would not thank him, as by this time they had found out that the boon was given to the landlords and not to themselves. He would now call the attention of the House to a transaction of the noble Lord in finance, to which this was the first opportunity he had of adverting. The noble Lord in the measure which he had assumed this year for the conversion of the four-per-cent stock, had entirely failed, or failed at least to the extent of one half; for out of 11,000,000 l. of four per cent stock, there were dissentients to the amount of 5,000,000 l. In what manner the noble Lord proposed to find means to pay off these dissentients he did not know; but he stated this fact, that the noble Lord might have an opportunity of declaring what those views were. He (Mr. Baring) had moved for certain papers with a view of ascertaining the details of an extraordinary operation on the part of the Government. Knowing what financial business was, he was surprised that a person at all acquainted with that business could have thought of pursuing the course which Government had been following. They had been buying stock and selling it, trafficking and dealing in the funds, day after day, in a manner totally inexplicable to every person accustomed to business. He had doubted the possibility of their having done as had been reported, and he had on a former occasion put a question on the subject to the noble Lord. He (Mr. Baring) supposed, that the noble Lord considered that

517
his question referred to the West-India grant, when he said such a transaction was not going on at all. He (Mr. Baring) had moved for papers, to which motion at first an objection had been made, although he was at a loss to know why papers of a financial character should be refused, nor did he recollect they ever had been refused to the House by any Minister. Having seen the papers, he was still more at a loss to conceive why their production should have been objected to. From the papers, it appeared, though he had had but little opportunity of examining them—that Government had been going into the market, buying and selling, day after day—such a transaction he had never known before. Gentlemen should be aware what the operation of the sinking fund was. The Commissioners of the National Debt, having the application of the money for the reduction of the debt, had the management of this fund. The Commissioners had also the care of the funds belonging to the savings' banks, amounting to 16,000,000 l. which were placed in their hands as the safest persons in whom that trust could be lodged, because the public had an assurance that nothing would be done by then but in the regular execution of their duty, and that they would not go out of their way to job and deal in the public funds. The noble Lord would probably say, that the Commissioners had a power to buy and sell. They had so, and an entire power over the funds of the banks. These funds, in November last, amounted to 8,239,000 l. in the three-and-a-half per cents, 4,200,000 l. in the three per cents and 3,100,000 l.in Exchequer bills. All the different acts certainly gave the Commissioners full power to deal with the assets of the savings-banks, "if they thought it expedient," or "advisable," or some phrase of that kind, which was always introduced, implying that the power was to be used for the purpose of the execution of the trust reposed in them, and for no other purpose whatever. What would be thought of these Commissioners when they, under that power, went jobbing in the Stock Exchange? That they should have the power of buying and selling was necessary, in order that they might invest money in, and be able to take money out of, the funds, on account of the banks. But no
518
person who read the Acts, and had common sense, could fail to see that to that extent their duty was confined. In the Bill which had been brought in some years ago for the reduction of the Four per Cents., a power was given to the Commissioners to use the funds of the savings' banks, with the provision already mentioned; but no one ever dreamed that they might job with them in the stocks. The noble Lord seemed, however, so to have interpreted the power which he found in former Acts given to the Commissioners, but it seemed to him (Mr. Baring) that the noble Lord had left out, or overlooked, the words "if expedient." He (Mr. Baring) had used the word "jobbing" as a short word which expressed clearly what had been done; but he was bound to say, that he believed every thing had been done with the purest intention, and he disclaimed imputing any interested motives; but the noble Lord had been badly advised. It seemed as if, under the circumstances of the Government, the noble Lord had been obliged to turn over financial matters to some other person in whom he reposed confidence. Never was confidence more misplaced than in this instance. The amount of the funds which had been sold out was as follows:—775,000 l.Three-and-Half per Cents.; 442,000 l. Three per Cents Reduced; and 1,131,000 l. Consolidated Three per Cents; making 2,348,000 l. stock. This had been sold, not for meeting engagements, but for the purpose of working the prices of the stocks, in order to carry into execution the project for the reduction of the Four per Cents. The stock thus sold out had been invested in Exchequer Bills. The noble Lord had not abandoned the hope of deriving benefit from his plan; but what possible object he could have in converting stock into Exchequer Bills he could not say. The noble Lord might allege that he had benefited the funds of the savings' banks by this operation. He was not satisfied upon that head; but still the noble Lord had no right thus to deal with funds sacredly appropriated by the Legislature and lodged in the hands of the Commissioners for security. It was no better excuse than that of a banker's confidential clerk, who, being sent some distance with considerable property, should step into a gambling-house, and tell his employers that he had used it to a profit. This would be as good an excuse as the noble Lord's for this device. The adviser of the noble

519
Lord, too, had set about the operation in a most blundering manner. In June, the Four per Cents were advertised for reduction; and what had been done in the mean time? The success of the operation depended on their being able to carry up the Three and a-half per Cents and other stocks. How had the cunning persons done who had advised the noble Lord? Why, from the 11th of June, every day, in June and July, they had been selling 10,000 l. of the Three and a-half per Cents. He had accounts of sales at 95–95, and 96; considerable sales had been made between the prices of 95 and 96. Suppose they invested this stock in Exchequer Bills, having sold at 95, and 96, how would they get it back at par? On the face of the papers a more blundering transaction he had never seen. With regard to the funds of the savings' banks, he found that every year they paid out more than they received. The last return was to November last year, when the sum which had been received by the Commissioners of Savings' Banks, for investment was 5,747,000 l., and they had paid interest and capital to depositors to the amount of 6,832,000 l.; therefore there was a difference,—a deficiency,—between the amount received, and the amount paid to creditors, to the extent of 1,085,000 l. The capital was sufficient to pay the creditors if stocks continued high; but what would be the consequence to the savings' banks if the price of stocks fell? Suppose a war should occur, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer had to come down with his fine-spun budget and confess, that he had no surplus, the difference between the prices of 95 and 60 would sink the 15,000,000 l. of capital of the savings' banks to 10,000,000 l. If they continued to pay any year more than they received, although the capital, from the circumstance of the rise in the price of stock, was sufficient to pay every one his due, the capital might be diminished. He must condemn the secret nature of the transactions by which the amount of stock sold by the Commissioners of the public Debt had been concealed. Under former Governments so jealous was the public of these sales, that the broker who had the management of them used to ascend the rostrum in the Royal Exchange, and announce, three months before, what amount of stock he had to dispose of. If these sales had been effected according to the
520
usual practice, and if public auction had decided who should be the purchasers, they would have turned out better for the public; and he was sure that the hon. member for Middlesex would agree with him that every publicity ought to be given in order to ensure and obtain the advantage of competition. He most fully allowed, that not the slightest shade of imputation would rest even for a moment on the motives of the noble Lord, and he never knew any person who filled that situation whose reputation on that ground was not of the same character; indeed, the public would not suffer any person but one of an unsullied reputation in that office; but though the noble Lord's character was as pure as unsunned snow, still there were many persons who had access to official information, the hangers-on of the Treasury, who availed themselves of their opportunities to make a fortune for themselves. He himself knew of an instance where such an individual's acquaintance with the intended operations of Government when it was about to borrow, and when it wanted to lend—that individual being a clerk of the Treasury which had enabled him to leave his family 10,000 l. a-year. Another charge he had to bring forward against the noble Lord was, that he had blundered in all his financial operations: that he had sold stock when he wanted to convert it. The noble Lord was the only Chancellor of the Exchequer that had ever failed in his operations in attempting the reduction of a stock, and he must say, that his measures and mode of working them had excited the ridicule of all those who were usually looked upon as critics in these affairs.
Lord Althorpthought, that the hon. Gentleman himself had made one or two mistakes in his account of these public transactions, and that he had added to those mistakes by what he had just addressed to the House. The hon. Gentleman objected to his (Lord Althorp's) proceedings, on the ground that they were contrary, if not to the letter, at all events to the spirit of the law. Now, in answer to this, he begged to state, that he applied to the Gentleman who had for years and years been employed in these transactions, and who advised him that he could take the course that had been adopted, without doing anything unusual, or in opposition to the Acts of Parliament relating to these matters. As to the operation itself,

521
the hon. Gentleman seemed also to labour under a mistake; for he supposed that his (Lord Althorp's) mode of raising stock was by selling stock. That was a mistake. He certainly had, at an early period, directed a gradual sale of stock, but he was not such a conjuror as to do it with any such intent as that ascribed to him. Then there was a mistake as to dates; the hon. Gentleman argued as if the dissentients to the proposed reduction of the Four per Cents, declared their dissent in June, when, in fact, the last day on which they could do so was the 28th of May. Therefore, there could not have been that effect on the stocks which the hon. Member supposed, and so there was another mistake. With respect to the effect of his measures, he begged leave to say, that instead of no advantage resulting from them, as further stated by the hon. Gentleman, the savings' banks had gained, on the 19th instant, on the stock sold to pay dissentients, a clear sum of 118,877 l. But the hon. Gentleman said, that his was the only plan for the reduction of stock that had ever been known to fail. The hon. Gentleman was greatly mistaken. It had not failed. He had carried his plan, and begged to say, that he was prepared without any difficulty whatever, to pay the respective amounts to every individual who dissented. Again, if the hon. Gentleman would look into the Act authorizing this reduction of stock, he would there find a specific power given to the Commissioners of Savings' Banks to do that which he so severely censured them for. Then the hon. Gentleman complained of the manner in which they had carried on their transactions—that they had not given sufficient publicity to them; but he (Lord Althorp) begged to remind the hon. Gentleman that there was a difference in the quality of the duties of these Gentlemen. Their functions as Commissioners for the reduction of the National Debt were wholly distinct from those which attached to them as Commissioners of Savings' Banks. As the latter functionaries, they had to purchase and to sell—they were in the position of bankers, who had to pay interest on deposits; they were, however, in a very different situation in the former instance. By publishing their intentions they might raise the market against them, in which case there certainly might be some ground for the charge of plundering. There was nothing in these transactions of an im-
522
proper or illegal character; nothing which told against the country; but, on the contrary, much that was in its favour. There was no ground for the charges made, or for the character which had been attached to the Government transactions by the hon. Gentleman. The great object he had in view was, that the prices of stock should be affected as little as possible, because it was clear, that if they were affected, the result would be to prevent him carrying his own measure into effect. He never thought of operating on the price of stock, or any such thing. He thought the House would see the futility of the charges that had been made, and that the mistakes were rather on the other than on that side of the House.
Mr. Baringsaid, that from the noble Lord's own statement, it appeared that these Commissioners had sold stock to the extent of 2,500,000 l., and he was sure he had only to state to those who knew anything about calculation this fact, to prove the utter hollowness of the scheme. The money thus realized by the sale of stock at 95 or 96 had been invested in Exchequer-bills at par. Now, Exchequer-bills bore interest at the rate of 1½d.a-day for 100 l., and this fund was obliged to pay 2¼d. a-day interest on the deposits placed there, so that the noble Lord would be the greatest conjuror that ever existed, if he could prove this transaction to be a gain to the savings' banks.
Lord Althorpobserved, that a similar operation had taken place in 1830.
Mr. Herriessaid, that there was obviously a mistake between the parties on this subject. The noble Lord had first made a profit, but in this second operation he had lost part of the profit which he had made; for he could not see how, by selling stock at 95 or 96 to reinvest at 100, any profit could accrue to the parties who engaged in such a transaction.
Mr. Goulburnhad been long convinced that the resources of the country, if managed with ordinary prudence, would be more than sufficient to meet the demands which could be made on them; and the state of prosperity in the country, unattended by any very extraordinary revulsion, would more than realize the expectations which had been entertained concerning it. Notwithstanding he agreed with the noble Lord in his anticipations of the elasticity of the resources of the country,

523
he differed from him on one important point of principle—namely, whether it was desirable or not in a state of profound peace to make an impression upon the public debt, or to bear in mind that a period would arrive when it would be impossible to make such a provision, and that the resources of the country might be crippled, and cast away for want of common foresight. He had been rather surprised, therefore, to find that the noble Lord had not stated explicitly whether the debt of the country would be increased or diminished at the end of the year; and he was the more concerned on this account when he saw that for the last three years, on account of compensation to the West-India planter, and by other means, there had been an augmentation to the debt of 200,000 l. per annum. How this charge had been incurred the papers to which he had before referred partly proved, and he was very much afraid that this particular charge, which had so much increased the debt, would be augmented at the end of the next year. In 1832, the charge of the debt was 28,100,000 l., and, in 1834, 28,310,000 l.; making altogether a difference of 210,000 l. The only effort that had been made by the noble Lord to make any kind of reduction in the permanent debt was a change of some of the stock into terminable annuities, so that instead of 749,000,000 l. it was now 736,000,000 l. apparently, but no real benefit would accrue till the end of thirty years, and the interest on the difference in the mean time, instead of 640,000 l., was 749,000 l. He would beg of the noble Lord, that if the weight of this millstone round our necks could not be diminished, at least not unnecessarily to augment it. He perceived, when the interest on the West-India fund was called for, that we should be in a situation far more burthensome than we had yet experienced. With respect to the budget generally, he thought that if the noble Lord felt himself at liberty to make any reduction of taxation, it ought to be to that portion of the community which was, at the present moment, the most oppressed. The noble Lord had told them that the commerce and trade of the country was in a prosperous condition, and he was rejoiced to hear it; but he had not told them that the agricultural interest, either of this country or of the colonies, was in the same fortunate situation. He had
524
therefore to complain, as he did on a former occasion, that the noble Lord had, instead of applying relief to the clauses which most required it, applied it to those who were confessed to be in a prosperous condition. It would be difficult, upon merely hearing the statement of the noble Lord, to go into a detailed argument upon his plan respecting the duty upon spirits; but a few points had struck him which he wished to remark upon. The noble Lord had said, that notwithstanding the high rate of duty on spirits in England, the amount brought to account kept constantly increasing, but that the duty of 3s. 4d. per gallon, which existed both in Scotland and Ireland, had been productive of very different results. That in Scotland the amount brought to charge was increasing under that duty, whilst in Ireland it was decreasing. The conclusion at which the noble Lord had arrived in considering this circumstance was, that the duty on spirits in Ireland should be diminished. Now, he was not quite sure, that upon looking narrowly into this question it would be found that in proportion to the consumption there was a greater extent of illicit distillation in Ireland than in Scotland. He did not know either upon what authority the noble Lord had arrived at the distinction he had described. [Lord Althorp: That of the Commissioners of Excise.] He, of course, had only the ordinary sources of information to judge from; but he should like to ask the noble Lord whether he was aware what proportion of the spirit manufactured in Scotland and Ireland, respectively, was exported to this country? The noble Lord, of course, knew that it had long been a complaint of the distillers, both of England and Ireland, that the Scotch distillers were able, (they themselves said, from superior skill, their opponents said by frauds upon the revenue), to send their spirits with advantage to the Irish and English markets. Before, therefore, he could acquiesce in the proposed reduction of duty on spirits in Ireland alone, he should like to have some more explicit information upon the subject than the noble Lord had given them. The noble Lord might tell him that a different wish already prevailed with regard to England and the other two portions of the United Kingdom. He admitted the fact that it was an evil, and he would not increase the evil by making those distinctions in duty, without a strong ground of

525
necessity being made out. Besides, unjust as the present rate of duty upon colonial spirits was, how much would its injustice be increased by a further reduction of the duty on spirits distilled in Ireland. Rum was admitted into the United Kingdom at a duty which was calculated with reference to the heaviest duty paid in England. The consequence was, that the consumption of rum was hardly known in Scotland or Ireland. Every reduction of duty in either of those countries, unless justified by paramount necessity, was an infliction of direct injury upon that colonial interest which, under any circumstances, it was the duty of Government to uphold and encourage; but if ever that interest had a claim to consideration, it was at the present moment, when its fate hung in the balance as it now did, and when he defied any man to say, with certainty, what would be the result of the great measure Parliament had passed with respect to it. Before he sat down, he wished to ask the noble Lord a question with respect to the period of the payment which the planters were to receive for the liberation of their slaves. The success of the measure for the emancipation of the slaves must depend, in a great degree, upon the means which the planters had of providing for the change of circumstances which would attend their liberation. They would be put to great preliminary expenses, and he was therefore anxious to know, whether the Government had made arrangements for the payment of the parties interested at the earliest possible period. If the payment was delayed, injury might be inflicted both upon the public and the West-India planters, which the twenty millions would be a long way from compensating. The change in the condition of the slaves was to be made on the 1st of August, so that the interval between that time and the meeting of Parliament would be a critical one. He did not put this question in a spirit of hostility to the Government, but from anxiety that nothing should occur to impede the proper and safe working of the measure of negro emancipation.
Mr. Poulett Thomsontrusted the Committee would allow him to make a few observations upon the remarks made by the hon. member for Essex on the Bill he had the honour to bring before the House a short time back. He had been peculiarly unfortunate as regarded his hon. friend;
526
for when he introduced that Bill, he gathered from the manner in which it was received that it was generally approved of by the House, and he did not even now despair of his hon. friend doing that which was not very uncommon with him—namely, change his mind. In the course of this evening, indeed, he had expressed an opinion with regard to one article affected by the Customs' Bill different from that which he had expressed on a former occasion, he meant oil.
Mr. Baringhad stated, that oil was the only article, the reduction of the duty on which he approved of.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonsaid, that he must in common with others who had heard his hon. friend, have misunderstood him, and if so, what became of all his hon. friend's wit about salad oil. The fact, he supposed was, that his hon. friend had found out, since he spoke, that oil was greatly used in the manufactures of this country.
Mr. Baringbegged to say, that he had stated on the former evening, what he had stated to-night, and which the right hon. Gentleman was pleased to call wit—namely, that the reduction of the duty, as far as regarded oil, employed in manufactures, was beneficial, although he certainly did not wish to see, if the distinction could be made, any reduction of the duty on oil used as an article of luxury.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonwas glad to have received the approbation of his hon. friend upon any point; but the amount of oil consumed as a luxury was, he could assure him, a mere trifle, compared to that employed in manufactures. With the exception, however, of this article, there was not one of those which had been selected for a reduction of duty which, upon going through the Customs-book, he should not have placed last upon the list to be so selected, and that, in point of fact, it was a waste of the public money to reduce the duty upon such articles. The articles, however, which had particularly excited the wrath of his hon. friend were those which came under the head of dried fruits, and especially currants. The hon. member for Essex treated these as articles of luxury, meaning, he presumed, that they were articles for the consumption of the rich, and not of the poor. Now, as regarded currants, he could assure his hon. friend, that he was completely mistaken in so describing them. It was notorious, that all but the very poorest class were in

527
the habit of consuming currants to a large extent, particularly in the north of England. His hon. friend near him, who was well acquainted with the mining districts of Durham and Northumberland, would support him in the assertion, that it was the constant practice of the miners to consume large quantities of this fruit. But he considered this article as worthy of their attention, not merely because a reduction of the duty upon it would lower its price to a large class of the community, with whom price was a matter of consideration, but because he thought that reduction might be made with scarcely any loss to the revenue. The hon. Member had stated, that the reduction was intended to benefit the Ionian islands, but that they would not be benefited by it, because they were suffering from the competition of their neighbours. But, it would be in the recollection of the House, that the reduction of this duty had been long pressed upon the Government. The answer which had uniformly been given to applications to this effect, and the answer which he had himself given, was, that it could not be done till the Ionian islands removed the export duty imposed upon the article; but last year the Ionian Legislature took off the export duty, and he felt himself bound in justice to meet their expectations by some diminution of the duty levied upon it in this country. Now, what was the duty upon this article, which the hon. Member said was the last he should select for reduction. The duty on currants was now 44 s. 2d., which, as their price was only 30 s., amounted to 175 per cent. This was a fact the hon. Gentleman could not be aware of; and he asked whether it were not likely, even in his view of the article, as one which was not generally consumed, but which, upon the principle of getting an equal amount of revenue with a less charge to the consumer, was so situated as to make a reduction of the duty upon it to 22 s. likely to be advantageous? Then, again, there was the article of prunes, which was one of great consumption among the poorer classes all over the Continent, and there was no reason why it should not also be consumed by the poorer classes of this country, if brought within their reach. The duty on that article was 27 s. 6d., which, as the price was only 14 s.amounted to 250 per cent. He proposed to reduce the duty to 7s., and he was satisfied that, if
528
anything, the revenue would gain by the reduction. He would not go through the whole list of fruits on which the duty was reduced. It would be sufficient to say, that they were all in about the same situation, viz. subject to a duty of from 150 to 200 per cent; and if they could reduce that duty, without any serious loss of revenue, he said, in spite of what his hon. friend would not allow him to call wit, he had no doubt that the majority, both of the House and of the public, would be with him. The amount of tax upon those articles, which would be abandoned, was about 120,000 l. Then came the other article of coals. He knew that this article involved a disputed question, and he did not intend to deny, that he was one of those who agreed in the principle, that if we had the perfect monopoly of an article of this description, it was unwise policy to surrender it to neighbouring countries, But to be able to stand by that principle, it was necessary first to be satisfied that we could maintain the monopoly, and next, that, being able to maintain it, the doing so was not attended with concomitant disadvantages, which weighed against it. Now, with respect to the first point, he was perfectly satisfied, from the experience they had had in the three years which had elapsed since the duty had been reduced, that we could not maintain our monopoly. It was a notorious fact, which any Gentleman who would take the trouble might verify beyond a doubt, that coal-fields were being opened in Holland, Belgium, and France; and that the collieries of those countries could compete with ours, and would, in a short time, be able to furnish themselves with that article. Then, with respect to the disadvantages of attempting to keep a monopoly which really could not be kept. Even at the present reduced duty, great quantities of small coal were burnt on the ground, and absolutely lost to the country, because they would not bear the export duty. Besides this loss, there was the injury we suffered from depriving our labourers of so much additional employment, and our shipping, of an extension of trade. If Gentlemen would take the trouble to look at the statement laid upon the table yesterday, they would perceive how large the amount of tonnage was, now employed in the export of coals; and that British shipping not only maintained a successful competition in the trade against the ship-

529
ping of countries with which we had not reciprocity treaties, and the articles exported in which were, therefore, subject to increased duties, but also against the shipping of countries with respect to which they had no such advantage. Besides, the abolition of the present duty would be a great relief to several important interests in the North of England now in a state of some suffering. In addition, therefore, to the great general public advantages of the proposed change, it would prove exceedingly advantageous to important classes of the community. But the hon. Member for Essex had said, that he should have preferred taking off the glass and the cotton duty. He was certainly not one who would object to the reduction of the duties on those articles; but when the hon. Member spoke of his (Mr. Thomson's) constituents not approving of the reductions made upon fruit and coals, he begged to say, that he believed his constituents were too intelligent and enlightened to object to any reduction which was for the general advantage of the country. They might, with him, be glad to see the duties on glass and cotton abolished; but when his hon. friend recommended its being done, did he recollect the circumstances connected with each? The duty on cotton was diminished more than one-half last year; and other classes might have some right to complain, if Ministers had this year devoted the whole of the sum they had to spare to the reduction of the remainder, which amounted to a larger sum by one-half than the whole loss by this measure, viz., 350,000 l. The duty on glass, on the other hand, amounted to 700,000 l. He believed, that no duty could be more beneficially taken off; but then it amounted to 700,000 l.; and every one knew it would be useless merely to reduce the duty, unless they could abolish it altogether, for they would not thereby get rid of the machinery by which it was collected, and the mischiefs it inflicted upon the manufacturer. He would say a few words upon the statements made by his hon. friend upon the subject of taxation generally. His hon. friend had found great fault with them in the first place for making any reduction, and for not devoting all they could spare to the Sinking Fund; but he went further, and stated one thing which he ought to have known was not correct. His hon. friend stated, that his
530
noble friend had come down to that House with a popularity budget, by giving up the principle of his predecessors of having a surplus. Now, the fact was, that after taking away the reductions made by the right hon. member for the University of Cambridge, his noble friend, when he came into office, found no surplus whatever. If, therefore, his noble friend had proceeded upon this principle, he could only have entered upon it by refusing to reduce any taxes for a considerable length of time, in order to save up a surplus. But the advantage attending the great reductions of taxation made by his noble friend, was, that the revenue sprung under them to a degree that made up half, if not more than half, of the amount reduced. He would state in round sums the amount of the several reductions which had been made in the last four years. In the year 1831, he found that, taking the difference between the taxes repealed and the taxes imposed, there was a balance of reduction amounting to 1,253,000 l. In the year 1832, the relief from taxation was 739,000 l.; in the year 1833, it was 1,636,000 l.; making a total for these three years of 3,628,000 l. This, added to the reductions his noble friend had announced that night (after deducting the new duties to be laid on) made a total, during the four years, of 5,329,000 l. The reductions made by the right hon. Member opposite, in the year 1830—some of which did not come into operation till 1831, amounted to 3,906,000 l., which made a total reduction of taxation in the course of five years, amounting to 9,233,000 l. And if the 750,000 l. his noble friend had provided for the interest of the grant to the West Indians was taken into the account, it would amount to 9,983,000 l. Now, what was the loss of revenue consequent upon this reduction of taxation? Only 4,580,000 l. He considered that statement to be an answer to those Gentlemen who objected to taking off taxes, because they preferred having a considerable surplus revenue, as well as an answer to those who objected to following out the plan of endeavouring to select articles for reduction, which either entered into the general consumption of the people, or were largely employed in the manufactures of the country. His hon. friend complained that more had not been done for the agricultural interest; and his hon. friend mentioned two trifles, which came

531
with a bad grace from one who almost ridiculed his noble friend's attempts to relieve that interest of its trifling burthens. The fact was, that there was very little in the way of taxation that was not of a trifling nature that pressed upon the agricultural interest, except the Malt-tax, which, he contended, pressed equally upon all the consumers of malt. But his hon. friend ought not to forget this, that the farmers were as much a part of the public as the inhabitants of towns, and would be just as much benefited by general reduction of taxation. He ought not to forget either, that the reduction of the duties on raw materials was not a benefit conferred on the commercial classes, but was largely, though indirectly, advantageous to every man who had capital to employ or labour to sell, by increasing the employment for capital and labour. In fact, it was utterly impossible for the productive powers of this country to be in any way extended without every class in it being benefited. He therefore thought, that the relief to be experienced from the reduction of the house or any other direct tax, little in comparison to that which would have been derived from the reduction of the taxes on glass, paper, and cotton; but at the same time he admitted that, in considering the expediency of maintaining a tax, they were bound to look to the greater or less pain, for so he must call it, with which it was paid. Now, unquestionably, the House-tax had been a cause of general and loud complaint, and his noble friend was, therefore, right in taking it off. But he trusted that what they had to spare might hereafter be devoted to the relief of productive industry; and if that course were well followed out, he felt satisfied, that they need not fear seeing those years of adversity which his hon. friend appeared to dread. They might, certainly, be subject to the fluctuations which visited all commercial countries; but, upon the whole, he doubted not they should go on in a long career of industrious improvement.
Sir Robert Peelagreed with the right hon. Gentleman, that it would have been infinitely better, upon every ground of policy, to have repealed the duty on glass, rather than to have removed the tax upon houses. But if that were true, why should the House not perform its duty to the country, by acting upon a firm and well-founded conviction of what was most ad-
532
vantageous, rather than yield, what at most, could be considered only as a partial and slight advantage, to any popular clamour which might be raised out-of-doors. The right hon. Gentleman said, that there was more pain in paying the House-tax than in paying the duty upon glass. He was not sure that those who clamoured most suffered most. At all events, they would directly contravene that which was their duty to their constituents, if they suffered any clamour raised by particular classes to overrule their better judgment, and induce them to take steps directly at variance with all the received principles of financial and commercial policy. The Glass-tax was, in every point of consideration, an extremely bad tax. A repeal of the Glass-tax would afford a greater relief to a large portion of the community than the repeal of the House-tax. The removal of the House-tax was merely a bonus to the landlord; the removal of the Glass-tax would be a bonus to every class of the community. If that were their conviction (and he believed it was admitted by every one capable of taking a comprehensive view of the subject of taxation), he did not see why the House should not act upon it, and refuse to yield to any clamour that might have been raised out-of-doors. It was not fitting that the decisions of this House should be governed by popular clamour. The tax upon glass was objectionable in another point of view; it had a great tendency to deteriorate the quality of the article. If they compared the glass made before the imposition of the tax with that which had been made since, it would be found that the latter was of an inferior quality. There was a double objection, therefore, to the continuance of this tax; it not only increased the price of the article, but, at the same time, rendered it of inferior quality. There was one other point to which he would refer. The right hon. Gentleman had not convinced him of the policy of encouraging the export of coals. The right hon. Gentleman said, that his constituents were so enlightened that he was sure they would make no objection to it. He felt that any opinion entertained by the right hon. Gentleman, both on account of his ability and of his situation in the Government, was entitled to great weight. He had, therefore, listened with attention to the whole of his argument upon that point, but the

533
right hon. Gentleman had not relieved his mind of the doubts which he entertained as to the policy of encouraging the export of coals. No doubt it would act as a temporary relief to certain distressed interests in the North; but transitory relief would be dearly purchased by a measure which went to deprive the country of one of its greatest natural advantages—the almost exclusive monopoly of coals. It appeared to him that the arguments in favour of the exportation of machinery, did not apply to the exportation of coals. It was said, that we had as great an interest in securing a monopoly for our domestic manufactures, as in retaining a monopoly in the production of coal, and, therefore, if we permitted the export of that machinery by which we had brought our manufactures to such perfection, upon the same ground we ought to permit the export of coals. The cases were seemingly, but not really, parallel. As regarded the exportation of machinery, the Legislature had no discretion to exercise, because it could not prevent the egress of the artisans by whom that machinery was made. Foreign countries became acquainted with the power and value of our machinery, and desired to purchase it from us. We refused to sell, except upon such terms as, in point of fact, amounted to a prohibition. What followed? Temptations were held out to our artisans and mechanics, to emigrate to those countries for the purpose of instructing the inhabitants in the art of constructing the machinery of which we previously had had the exclusive monopoly. The danger of this was at once perceived. It became obvious that our monopoly of machinery could not be retained, because, if we refused to sell it to foreign countries, foreign countries, through the medium of our own artisans, would make it for themselves. We had, therefore, no discretion. It was better that we should encourage our domestic manufacture of machinery by allowing a free export of it, than that we should continue the prohibition, and thereby encourage the emigration of the manufacturer. But that argument did not apply to coal. He was not at all satisfied as to the proof of the very abundant supply of coal in this country. He knew that the reproduction of coal (and the evidence of reproduction was far from convincing—in fact, he might say, that there was no positive evidence of a reproduction) was
534
not so rapid as the consumption. Then the Legislature was surely not to contemplate merely the present interests of the country—it was bound to look forward—to look forward even for a period of 400 or 500 years. In matters of legislation or of fiscal arrangement, the interests of remote periods ought always to be considered, unless some immense immediate advantage was to be gained. He was not satisfied that the supply of coals in this country—he meant of coals lying so near the surface as to be procured upon cheap and moderate terms, was so abundant as some hon. Gentlemen supposed. That somewhere in the bosom of the earth there was a supply that might last for centuries he did not mean to deny; but if it had to be procured at such a cost as to render the price of coal in this country equal to what it was in foreign countries, there must be an end at once to the great advantage for manufacturing which we now enjoyed. What was the right hon. Gentleman's argument? He said, that we could not maintain our monopoly of coal, because coal fields had been discovered in several parts of the continent. Now that, in his opinion, instead of being an argument in favour of becoming exporters of coal, was directly an argument against it. If there were coal upon the continent, the countries of the continent would encourage the use of it in preference to coal coming from this country. Therefore, the amount of our export was not likely to be great, though, if the countries of the continent have coal of their own, it would induce them to establish manufactures to rival ours. If, therefore, we had any advantage in the production of this important article, it was proper to maintain it to the fullest extent There was one subject connected with the financial operations of the country to which he wished to have the opportunity, before the termination of the Session, to call the attention of the House—he alluded to the present system of banking throughout the country. He was sorry that the attention of Parliament had not yet been called to that subject. A Committee had been appointed to inquire into the system of banking in the metropolis, but that Committee did not enter into any inquiry as to the system of country banking. It instituted no inquiry into the effects of the 7th Geo. 4th, chap. 46, which enabled Joint-Stock Banks to be established

535
making all the members of those banks individually responsible for the debts of the company. He did not wish to give any opinion upon the subject; but it was one deserving the attention of Parliament; indeed he could not conceive one which more imperatively called for their attention, than the whole relation of private banking, considered in connexion with the joint-stock system, and the new law by which the paper of the Bank of England would become a legal tender, and which he feared might be improvidently acted upon, unless some check were given to it. He could not help thinking that the Act of the 7th Geo. 4th—to the introduction of which he was a party—was acted upon very differently from the intentions of those who brought it in. Branch banks had been established in almost every town, by persons roving about and selecting some unoccupied spot, no matter whether they had any local connexion with the town or the surrounding neighbourhood. No sooner did they find a vacant place, than they at once established a Joint-Stock Bank. He found that some of these companies were carrying on district banks with a capital of 500,000 l., consisting of 100,000 shares of 5l. each; so that all the security which the public had, was the personal responsibility of these owners of 5l. shares, for the whole amount of the debts of the bank. It appeared to him that this might prove to be a very inadequate security. In his opinion no company should be allowed to issue paper, or, as it were, coin money, without control as to their liability. These persons traded under very different circumstances from all others. They might trade as much as they pleased if they were not connected with money; but the moment they became so connected, the interests of the whole country were liable to be affected by their proceedings; so that the Parliament acquired the right to provide some effectual check against the imprudence of such banks, and was bound to devise a security for those who placed confidence in the solvency of the bank, if the Legislature should see reason to do so. Several of these banking establishments set out with conditions in the formation of them, which appeared seriously deserving consideration. Among these conditions in one of these banks every shareholder was entitled to cash credit to the extent of two-thirds of the amount of stock paid up. It was also a very common provision,
536
that should one-fourth of the paid-up capital be at any time lost, the company was thereby dissolved. That was done for the purpose of preserving a limited responsibility; but was it the law of the land, that when one-fourth of the paid-up capital should be lost, the company should be dissolved, and all liability be at an end? [An Hon. Member: "No."] But it was the practice; and the means by which persons were induced to take these 5l. shares. Was not that a strong reason for calling the attention of Parliament to this subject? Ought not these liabilities to be expressly defined? If this were the law, then the security offered by the bank was a fallacious one; if it were not the law, then these persons had no right to invite individuals to take shares in the bank, by holding out to them the terms of an engagement which could not be realized. The Government placed confidence in that enactment which made each individual responsible for the debts of the company, which, practically, was not so good a security, and, therefore, not entitled to such confidence as is generally imagined. Suppose a joint-stock company to be formed, in which the public confide, believing that every member of it is directly liable for the debts of the company. The public, finding eight or ten rich individuals to be shareholders, would conceive that they had an immediate lien upon the property of those eight or ten individuals in case of the insolvency of the bank; but he apprehended that no such lien would attach, until after judgment had been obtained in a Court of Law. He apprehended that a bank founded under 7th Geo. 4th, was required to certify at the Stamp Office the name of the officer of the company, by whom and against whom, all actions were to be brought. He should not, he apprehended, be entitled to any execution against an individual member of the company, until he had brought his action against this officer, and had obtained judgment against him. That would postpone very considerably the claim which he might have upon the rich individual members of the company. An action was tried in this country against Sir Abraham Bradley King, who was sued as an individual member of a joint-stock company. The Court of King's Bench would not allow process to be issued against him—on account, he presumed, of some informality; but whatever the cause,

537
it had the effect of completely defeating the claim of the parties. But the case under the 7th of Geo. 4th, was much stronger; for in the first place, it was quite clear that no individual member of the company was responsible, until after judgment had been obtained against the officers of the company, and then the claim must, in the first instance, be made upon those who were members of the company at the time when the process issued; and, in failure of the claim being liquidated by those parties, then an action would lie against those who were members of the company at the time the debt was contracted; but if these latter parties had contrived to get out of the company, the claim could not be made against them until after a trial by law had been had against all those who remained. His experience convinced him, that any security which did not take effect until after two successful law-suits, was not worth much. The expense of a law-suit is so enormous in this country, that unless the debt be very considerable, the security which the public would obtain, after two successful law-suits, must practically be none at all. He was afraid, that at this period of the Session, it was too late to do anything effectually upon this subject; but he trusted the noble Lord would devise some means to check the rage for speculative joint-stock companies, and seriously consider what would be the probable effect of the Act which was about to come into operation by which Bank paper would become a legal tender. He hoped the noble Lord would understand the meaning of his observation, that notwithstanding the large remission of taxation, such was the buoyancy of the resources of the country, that the result had been of considerable benefit to the public, without any injury to the revenue of the country. All this the noble Lord should remember had taken place under a metallic currency, which, nevertheless, had been declared to be utterly inconsistent with the expansion of our resources. But if that had been the effect, as he believed, it was only an additional reason for adhering to a metallic standard—and it ought to encourage the Legislature to watch, not with childish suspicion, but with rational jealousy and discrimination, any attempts to involve the country afresh in an indefinite extension of an irredeemable paper currency.
Mr. Humedoubted the propriety of the
538
conduct of Government in meddling, as it had done, in the buying up of public funds with the millions belonging to the savings' banks which happened to be in its hands. There was much danger in these stock-jobbing transactions, in which Government ought never to meddle. He hoped that the accounts relating to the buying up of part of the Four per Cents would be speedily laid before them, and that no more such transactions would take place. He felt convinced that it would turn out that a loss had been already sustained. If they could create a new market by the repeal of the Coal-tax, that repeal would be advantageous to the nation at large. With regard to servants, it was advisable to take the duty off servants of eighteen years of age. But why confine it to those residing in their own parishes? That was injurious by checking free labour. All these checks added to the embarrassment of society. What would they do in case of doubtful parentage? The proposed plan would add to litigation, by instituting various grounds of objection. He approved of the remismission of the Window-tax on houses varying in value from 100 l. to 150 l. He could not, however, see the policy of the limit proposed. Why confine it to farm houses? Why not extend it to towns? The burthen was as grievously felt in towns, as in the country. The removal of the duty on stamps on almanacks was another great good. There was no branch in which there was greater piracy than that. Then, as to the duty on spirits, in place of taking off a shilling in Ireland it would be better to take off sixpence in England and Scotland, for the great object should be to equalize relief. With respect, then, to the duty on spirits he thought that if whisky were made as cheap as beer people would not drink it. The Legislature brutalized men, and then was surprised that they were brutes. In France, and Holland, and Belgium, where spirits were cheap, were the people there as intemperate as here? He did not know what evidence was laid before the Drunken Committee, or the Committee on Drunkenness, but he would say, that it would be wise to reduce the duty so as to make the commodity cheap, and therefore valueless. He would lay on such a duty as would prevent smuggling—beyond that he would not go. He would also take off the duty on all newspapers,

539
which would in the end increase the circulation of periodicals and add to the revenue, while they increased the stock of knowledge. A great field was open in the colonies for retrenchment; they were throwing large sums away on the colonies without any good. There was another material point. In Scotland property under 100 l. was cruelly and most mischievously taxed. If a person died worth only 20 l. the officers came in and took an inventory of even an old nightcap, and this at a time when the family were in the greatest affliction. Now the amount of that tax was not more than 60,000 l. and its remission would be a great benefit. Next he would recommend the noble Lord to place the Catholic and Dissenting clergy with respect to the taxes on horses on an equality with the clergy of the Established Church, which would be the removal of great discontent and great hardship. The naval and military forces of the country were also kept on at an exorbitant scale, and he hoped by next Session they would be reduced. He hoped the tax on newspapers in Ireland and England would be removed, and that the House and the country would not witness the singular and revolting fact of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Lord Chancellor holding different opinions.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, he had one word to say for Ireland. He heard of prunes, currants, salad-oil, stockjobbing, foreign newspapers—in a word, of relief to be given in every way, and to every article, but he heard little of Ireland. By the Grand Jury Bill it was recommended to take off the duties on stamps, but by the decision of the Judges the parties, in order to make the stamp binding, should pay ll.; so that they were released from the duty of 3s. 4d., and were saddled with 20 s. When the people were fined 1l. for each award in order to make it binding in a country where most of the disputes of the people were decided by award, and the encouragement of which system would tend greatly to check litigation, they were effectively shut out from the facilities of obtaining justice. The noble Lord said, that he took off one half of the spirit license, and this he called a boon to Ireland. But it was in reality an injury; for the effect would be to reduce in the country places the number of licensed houses, and increase the number of illicit
540
stills. Was it a relief to Ireland, to increase the consumption of whisky? The effect, however, would be to increase the consumption in the large towns, where it must be a great evil. It would be no relief to farmers, for the corn would be sold whether the whiskey were lawful or illicit. On the contrary, by introducing facilities for drunkenness it must necessarily check trade and industry. If the noble Lord took off the duty on glass, or abolished the 236,000 l. duty on that article, he would grant a boon to the people, and consult their health and comfort. That trade was utterly ruined. There were only two glass factories in Ireland, one in Cork, another in Dublin, and he was told one in Waterford, all in a decaying state. It was well to make a distinction between Scotland and Ireland, for the facility of transmission by the introduction of steam, brought Ireland and England in such close connection, that if some protection were not afforded to Ireland she could have no trade.
Mr. Secretary Ricesaid, as far as the country parts of Ireland were concerned, the project of the Chancellor of the Exchequer would prevent illicit distillation, and so far no one could deny that it would be a benefit for Ireland. But the hon. member for Dublin said, that it would increase the consumption in the towns, where it was most desirable that the consumption should be diminished. Now to prevent illicit distillation in the country was going far to prevent the large consumption of whisky in the towns. Illicit distillation in the towns would have the same bad effect as the small stills in the country—so that in proportion as illicit distillation were checked so would most of the evils of drunkenness and its consequences be prevented. It was notorious that illicit distillation grew up under the pressure of high duties. Nothing was attended with more demoralizing and disorganizing consequence than illicit distillation. It arrayed the police and the peasantry, the functionaries of Government and the people, against each other. Even the Magistrates, though they might be called on to crush the system, too often encouraged it, because it enabled the poor tenants to pay a portion of their rents. The great expense of collecting the duty was another great evil. As to the duty on glass in Ireland, the reduction of that duty, if

541
it were made, must be met by a corresponding reduction of the duty in England. At least if that were not the case and the drawback as at present were allowed on exportation it was clear, that the reduction of the duty in Ireland would be of no advantage whatever to that country. If the duty were reduced in Ireland alone and the drawback continued, the glass manufacturers of Ireland would find themselves driven out of the market by the inferior articles exported from England for the sake of the drawback. There were certainly some disadvantages under which the Irish and Scotch laboured with respect to the spirit trade, but as a Committee was appointed to inquire into that subject, and as it was important that justice should be done to both countries, Government would wait until the Committee gave its Report.
Captain William Gordonthought, that Scotland had some reason to complain of the course taken by the noble Lord, who proposed to take ls. a gallon off Irish spirits, without any correspondent reduction of the duty on Scotch spirits, notwithstanding the importance of that branch of trade to the agriculture of that country.
Lord Althorpsaid, that, in taking off the tax on farmers' servants under eighteen years of age, his object was not so much to relieve the persons who employed them as to render those servants useful, and to prevent them from the temptations that resulted from their living out of the houses of their employers. In confining the taking off of the window-duties to farmhouses, his object was, to do for the country what he had done for the towns by taking off the House-tax. In the circumstances in which he found the country placed, he thought he was doing right when he took off the House-duty, and, if he could find any means to supply the deficiency that would arise from taking off the duty on glass, he certainly would be glad to remove that duty also. If hon. Gentlemen pressed for so many different reductions, it would be impossible for him to make the reductions he thought would be most beneficial to the country generally. His hon. friend had suggested many reductions. He hoped, and even thought, that he should be enabled to make still further reductions, and he assured the House that he would continue to make reductions as long as he could make them consistently
542
with the public service. He had every hope, that the situation of the country would enable him to reduce taxation still more.
Mr. Peasewas ready to congratulate the House on the removing of the House-duty; but what he especially rose for was to express his satisfaction at the Budget that had been now introduced. He saw that such reductions had been made as might be expected from a liberal Ministry. The taking off the duty on coals would be a great advantage to trade; but he would say, as far as regarded manufactures, that that, duty came two or three years too late. He did not approve of the protection given to English ships that carried coals to foreign countries, for he did not see the use of a heavier duty on coals exported in foreign bottoms.
Mr. Matthias Attwoodconsidered, that the noble Lord (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would have better consulted the interests of the mercantile world by taking off the Stamp-duties on bills of exchange than by any other reduction he had made.
Mr. Jameswas glad that the House-tax had been taken off. He was glad when any tax was taken off, but he should be more heartily pleased if he saw the tax upon malt removed. With respect to what had fallen from the right hon. member for Tamworth, he wished to say, that Joint-Stock Banks, the members of which were responsible to the extent of their shares, were far more safe than any private banks could be.
In answer to a question,
Lord Althorpstated, that with respect to the unfunded debt, properly so called, there was no increase whatever. There might have been issues of Exchequer-bills for private purposes, but for general purposes there had been no increased issues, at least none that could in any way affect the surplus for the year. The cause of the increased charge for interest for the unfunded debt was, that permanent annuities had been changed into terminable ones. Some had been converted into life annuities; indeed a very considerable sum had been so converted; and this also added to the increased charge.
Mr. Buckinghamsaid, that the well-wishers of Ireland would not approve of the reduction that had been made in the duty on Irish whisky.
Mr. Shawalso objected to the reduction of the Irish spirit duty, which would be

543
attended with evil, especially in large towns.
Mr. Robert Wallacesaid, that, at that late hour of the night, his observations should be very brief, and confined entirely to what related more particularly to Scotland. He had hoped the time had arrived when a more liberal line of policy would have given place to the existing distinction of duties between the different parts of the empire, but to his surprise and regret he found it to he the intention of the Government still further to widen this distinction, by charging different duties on British spirits made in Ireland and Scotland as well as in England. He would enter his protest against a higher duty being paid in Scotland than in Ireland. It was impossible, with justice to the Scotch agricultural interest, and the immense capital invested in distilleries, to tax the produce of her poorer soil and worse climate, at a higher rate than what is grown in the fertile soil of Ireland. Independent of this, smuggling to an immense extent must be the immediate result. He was intimately acquainted with the facilities existing for this purpose; the shores of the two countries were supplied with innumerable small craft, having harbours and creeks at every turn, which would render it impossible to prevent smuggling the cheaper spirits of Ireland directly into Scotland. He further objected to the raising the price of spirits by an additional charge on licenses only; if additional revenue must be raised upon the sale of spirits, it would be nothing more than just that a portion of it should be paid by the producer of the spirits, as well as by the seller. He would reserve his further remarks until a future time.
Mr. O'Reillythought it would have been better, if, instead of the duty on spirits being reduced ls. a gallon in Ireland, the duties had been equalized throughout the three kingdoms.
Mr. Ewartobjected to the continuance of the tobacco duty in its present shape, and declared it to be a most unequal and grievous impost.
Mr. Mark Philipshoped, that when the noble Lord should have a surplus on a future opportunity, he would remit the duty on raw cotton.
Mr. Thomas Attwoodconcurred in what had fallen from the right hon. member for Tamworth with respect to Joint-Stock banks, which were merely propping and
544
bolstering up an unsound system for a time, while they were preparing the materials for another panic. The Scotch banks had not yet been put to the test; but when they were, they would not pay 20 d. in the pound. He was convinced, that we were going in the wrong direction, that the country was not prosperous, and that our burthens were too great for our present means. The country was not yet at the extremity of its distress; but when prices were brought down completely to the continental level, then rents and taxes must come down to the same level, or, otherwise, the country could not go on. It was pressed down by its burthens, and either they must be reduced, as well as prices, to the continental level, or the means of the country must be made adequate to bear them.
The Resolutions were agreed to.
The House resumed; the Report to be received.

MINUTES.
Bills. The Royal Assent was given by Commission to the following Bills:—Four-per-Cent Annuities; Pensions (Civil Offices); Navy Pay; Landed Securities (Ireland); Administration of Justice in Boroughs; Central Criminal Court; Sale of Tea; Greenwich Hospital; London Port Dues; Chimney Sweepers; Roman Catholic Marriages; Common Fields' Exchange; and a Number of Private Bills.—Read a third time:—Newspaper Stamps (Ireland); Stannaries Court (Cornwall).
Petitions presented. By the Marquess of BUTE, from the Shareholders of the London and Westminster Bank, in favour of the Bill concerning the Bank.—By the Earl of MANSFIELD, from the Parochial Schoolmasters of Kincardine, for an increased Stipend.—By the same, from the same Place; and by Lord WYNFORD, from Liverpool; and Lord TEYNHAM, from Kensington and Rowley Regis,—ageinst the poor-Laws' Amendment Bill.
460
—By the Duke of BUCCLEUGH, the Bishop of GLOUCESTER, and Lord COLCHESTER, from several Places,—for Protection to the Established Church, against the Claims of the Dissenters, and against the Universities' Admission Bill.

GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY.
Lord Wharncliffe Lord Wharncliffe moved the second reading of the Great Western Railway Bill.
The Earl of Cadoganrose to oppose the Motion. He observed, that the road front Windsor to London was the first which had been projected through this part of the country, and this road, which on that account deserved their Lordships' favour, would be materially affected, and its projectors injured by this Bill. There were roads extending along different parts of this line, which only required to be connected together in order to render them perfect. That object might be effected at less expense, and with greater advantage, than the road which was called by the high-sounding appellation of the great Western Railway. This project had been so altered in the Committee in the Commons, that it was no longer capable of performing the promise at first held out, but would, at least at the London end, leave the parties at a distance of three or four miles from London, to bring their goods hither how they could. The road was now to terminate at Brompton, which would have the effect he had stated. This was his first objection. His next objection was, that the line now contemplated was not a complete line, as the road came from Bristol to Bath, but left goods between Bath and Reading to be brought by the Kennet and Avon Canal Company, and from Reading to Brompton by the Rail-road. The third objection he had was, that the number of the assents was not so great, nor was their property so considerable, as that of the dissents; and the fourth objection was, that their Lordships had already given their assent to the London and Southampton Railway Bill, which would be rendered almost good for nothing, for at least a considerable part of the distance, if this Bill should be carried. Under these circumstances he should move, "That the Bill be read a second time this day six Months."
Lord Wharncliffehoped that their Lordships would read this Bill a second time, and allow the case of the promoters of the Bill to be put forward in the Committee. The noble Earl opposite had started four objections to the Bill. The first was one which neither the noble Earl nor a noble

461
Marquess who was in the same situation with him, should ever have thought of putting forward. It related to the terminus of the road at London. The noble Earl objected that the road would not come into London, but would leave the goods to be brought hither from Brompton. Why, the fact was, that the promoters of the Bill were prevented from bringing the road to London by the noble Earl, through whose estates at Chelsea it would have passed, but who would not consent to allow it to do so; otherwise it would have been carried, as at first intended, to Southwark-bridge. But surely after preventing it coming to London, the noble Earl ought not to turn round and object to the whole measure, because it did not come here. The second objection was the strongest; but then there was a good canal from Bath to Reading, and at least the parties were entitled to be heard against this objection, and he for one was prepared to say, that if they did not make the communication complete, he should not be prepared to give his assent to the measure. As to the third objection, he declared, that the assents exceeded the dissents, both in their numbers, and in the value of their property. The noble Earl and he were, therefore, at issue on that point, and he asked for the Committee to inquire into the difference. As to the last point, he declared, that he did not believe the scheme of the Southampton Railway Bill would ever be put in execution; but whether it were or not, he did not believe that that was a reason why the Kennet and Avon Canal people should be disappointed in their expectations of opening a direct communication between Bristol and London. It was not usual, in matters of this kind, to refuse a second reading to a Bill, and he hoped that the usual custom would not now be departed from. The line of the proposed rail-way was objected to by some, and it was said, that a better line could be found; but that line would have to pass through the long walk at Windsor, and he for one would never consent to spoil in that manner the finest domain in the kingdom. As to the line ending at Brompton, he repeated, that it was not the fault of the projectors that that terminus had been adopted; and, if the noble Earl would consent to the line of road passing through his estate at Chelsea; the projectors would make good that part of their original plan.
The Earl of Cadoganthought, that the noble Lord opposite had pressed him unfairly on the point last referred to. He had, like other men, resisted a proceeding of one of the details of the Bill, that would materially injure his property; but he denied, that his opposition to the Bill itself arose out of any but public grounds. The question now put to him had been so pressed upon him by the projectors of the rail-road, that he had at last been obliged to say, that he should consider the question in future as an insult, and to desire that it might not be repeated. That part of the matter he was ready to answer as a private individual; but as to the rest, his conduct in this, as on other occasions, was decided by a consideration of what seemed to him the balance of public good, as against injury to private individuals, and in this case he did not think the balance in favour of the Bill.
Lord Teynhamsupported the Bill, which he thought would be a public benefit.
The Duke of Cumberlandsaid, that from their having sat as many as six weeks on another measure the same description, and from the length of time this Bill had been passing the other House, he was sure it was impossible that there would be time enough for them to get through with the Bill in what remained of the present Session. It appeared to him, therefore, that it would he deluding and cheating the parties interested, to lead them to a belief that, even if they should be able to prove their case, it would, under the existing circumstances, avail them any thing.
Lord Ellenboroughwas inclined to think, that, if the Bill had occupied so much time already, the parties must have exhausted what they had to say on the subject. He must declare, that it appeared to him a little hard on the parties who had been at the trouble and expense of promoting the Bill through the other House of Parliament, that their Lordships, on its getting into this House, should cut the neck of it at once. The Bill was a very important one to many parts of the country; if passed, it would be the means ultimately of opening a communication between London and Bristol, and consequently with the south of Ireland. He trusted their Lordships would consent to go into a Committee on the Bill.
The Earl of Radnormust confess, that he, for one, was inclined to cut the neck of the Bill, for the sake of the parties themselves. The Bill was not what it pretended to be. It professed to be a measure for the formation of a great Western Railroad, but it was no such thing. It was in fact a measure for the formation of a rail-road from London to Reading, and then (there being an intermediate line of considerable distance of the Kennet and Avon canal) from Bath to Bristol.
The Duke of Buckinghamsaid, that the noble Lord was mistaken in saying, that the Bill appeared under false colours. In the preamble, it was distinctly stated, that the Bill was for the formation of a rail-road from London to Reading, and from Bath to Bristol. He thought, that such a rail-road would be a great public convenience.
The Marquess of Londonderrythought their Lordships had better allow the Bill to be read a second time, and leave the parties to take their chance of its being passed through the Committee.
Their Lordships divided on the question, that the Bill be read a second time: Contents 30; Not-contents 47—Majority 17.
The Duke of Cumberlandbegged to be understood as not having declared himself contrary to the Bill, having voted against it solely because it had been delayed to so late a period of the Session.
Lord Wharncliffesaid, he feared that the determination to which the House had come would occasion great discontent among the people, which would be increased by the reason now given for the determination. What did that determination hold out, but that if parties could by any means, no matter how vexatious, delay the progress of a Bill, this House would not entertain any inquiry into the merits of a measure so delayed at an advanced period of the Session? It would lessen the confidence of the people in the justice of the House.
The Earl of Eldonbegged to tell the noble Lord, that he had given his vote on conscientious grounds, and he was not to be told that such a vote would be injurious to their Lordships in the estimation of the people.
Lord Wharncliffesaid, he did not charge any of their Lordships with not having given a conscientious vote on this
464
occasion. He claimed for himself that he had done so; for though he advocated this Bill, he had no private interest in it, and he believed that their Lordships' votes had been equally conscientious. At the same time he must declare, that be considered their decision on the question could not prove a good precedent. It would have the effect of showing that parties might be defeated by a pertinacious opposition, involving a loss of time.
The Duke of Cumberlandsaid, that the effect of their Lordships' decision would be to give a lesson on the expediency of forwarding Bills, instead of procrastinating them.
The Earl of Radnorsaid, that he performed his duty conscientiously, trusting to Providence for the consequences, and he thought he ought not to be reproached with his vote.
The Amendment, that the Bill be read a second time that day six months, was agreed to.

FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC POLICY.
The Earl of Winchilsearose for the purpose of putting a question to the noble Viscount at the head of the Government, with the view of getting a clear and distinct statement as to the principles which his Majesty's Ministers intended should guide them with reference to the foreign and domestic policy of the country. If they looked at the position in which the country now stood, it must appear to every one that there were questions at issue affecting all classes of the community. Indeed, he would venture to say, that there never was a period in the history of this country when information as to the course of policy adopted by his Majesty's Government was more generally or more imperatively called for. Any charge of factious motives with respect to his opposition was most unjustly founded. He could put his hand on his heart, and honestly declare that, of all the votes he ever gave against the measures of the present Government, not one of them had been influenced by factious motives, nor did he ever enter into any bond of union with persons on that side of the House for the purpose of getting up a factious opposition. With respect to the two measures formerly alluded to by the noble and learned lord on the Woolsack, his opposition to them had been on conscientious grounds. He had never wished,

465
nor did he wish at present, to embarrass in any way his Majesty's Government; and, however much he might differ from the opinions of the members of that Government, he had no wish to prevent them from carrying useful measures by an unnecessary and uncalled for opposition. He could honestly say, that he had not the slightest desire to increase the difficulties under which the present Government laboured—difficulties which all must acknowledge were unparalleled in the annals of this country—which no human wisdom or legislation could meet and successfully encounter. He contended that the balance of power in this country was completely destroyed, and he trusted, that the noble Viscount opposite, who was now at the head of his Majesty's Government, would make the communications that were demanded of him. With respect to foreign countries, he would beg their Lordships to look to Spain and Portugal—ay, to Portugal—for it was a grievous mistake to imagine that the contest in this latter country was ended. That contest would be renewed by the partisans of that prince who was now an exile, but whom the people of Portugal looked upon as their rightful monarch. He was their lawful prince, not expelled from Portugal by the people of that country, but driven from it by the gold and warriors of England. He begged to call the attention of the House to the situation Portugal was in, and he asked whether it was not the duty of the present Government to give their Lordships some information as to the line of policy intended to be pursued with respect to that country. If they cast their eyes towards Holland, they would see a prince and a people who had been most cruelly used, and who were only waiting for a fit opportunity to avenge the injuries they had received. He would ask the Government, therefore, whether they had made any pledges as to the line of foreign policy they were inclined to adopt, whether they intended to interfere in the internal regulations of other countries, and whether they had pledged this country to that effect? He called upon the noble Viscount, in order to know from him whether any interference on the part of this country was intended respecting Spain? He asked this question because he had read in the journals of the day, that certain vessels, supposed to be conveying arms to Spain in favour of the
466
cause of Don Carlos, had been stopped. He desired to know whether those vessels had been arrested by order of the Government of this country. He also desired to be informed whether any compact had been entered into between this country and France respecting Spain, and respecting Don Miguel. Was this country pledged to France to aid her in forwarding her objects with respect to Spain and Portugal? Upon those subjects he sought for specific information at the hands of the existing Government. The Table of that House was groaning beneath the petitions of the people, complaining that their sources of wealth and greatness had been dried up and destroyed. He called upon the noble Viscount to state whether the Government of which he was the head were determined or not to uphold the institutions of the country, to support the Church and State, to support the Church of Ireland; and whether they intended honestly to correct the abuses of those institutions, to reform the Church of Ireland, but not to surrender a particle of the property that belonged to that Church. He asked those questions in order to afford the noble Viscount an opportunity of stating the line of policy he meant to pursue, and the measures he intended to adopt in the present awful state of the country. The noble Viscount would, he hoped, state the course of foreign and domestic policy he intended to pursue. For his own part he held, that the principle of non-interference in the internal regulations of other countries ought to be strictly adhered to, if Government wished to uphold the institutions of this country, which institutions every person and every Government ought to respect.
Viscount Melbournesaid, that with every intention to pay that attention and respect to the noble Earl which he deserved, he must say, at the same time, that he found it extremely difficult to comprehend the nature of the noble Earl's questions, and of course extremely difficult to give an answer to them. The noble Earl said, that he rose to put two questions, and the noble Earl had prefaced them by a speech, into the multifarious topics of which he did not feel it necessary on the present occasion to enter. He must repeat, indeed, that he did not precisely understand the nature of the noble Earl's questions. The noble Earl seemed to think, that it was some imputation on him, that he had not

467
followed the example of those who had preceded him in the situation which he at present filled, in making a statement as to the general principles on which the Government would be conducted. Looking, however, at the peculiar situation in which the present Government stood—seeing that it was not in any respect a new Government, that it was in fact only a renewal of the old Government, with the loss of one member, whose loss all must deplore,—seeing that there were no persons in the present Government who had not been, in some situation or other, connected with the former Government—taking all these circumstances into consideration, he thought that they constituted a sufficient guarantee, without any necessity for a specific declaration on the part of the head of the Government, as to the principles upon which the present Government would be conducted, and as to the views and measures which they had in contemplation. The former Government had existed more than three years. The measures which it had proposed, the principles upon which it had acted, both as regarded foreign and domestic policy, were before the country, and there was nothing for him to do but to follow up those principles, suiting them to the circumstances of the times, and to the events that might possibly arise. The noble Earl had complained that factious motives had been imputed to noble Lords on that side of the House, and that they had been represented as desirous to embarrass his Majesty's Government. He was not aware that any such insinuations had ever been cast from that side of the House upon noble Lords opposite; at all events, he could say, that such insinuations had never proceeded from him. The noble Earl said, that he had given notice of his questions. That was a novel thing in Parliamentary practice, and he (Viscount Melbourne) could not exactly see the utility of it. When a notice of a Motion was given, the objects and purport of the Motion could generally be gathered from the nature of the notice; but it was quite a different thing as regarded a notice as to putting questions. A noble Lord might give notice to this effect—"I shall tomorrow ask questions as to foreign policy and domestic policy." Was there any possibility of collecting from such a notice the precise nature of the questions that might be asked? He did not think that
468
he should be acting rightly if he should on this occasion allow himself to be led into a discussion of all the topics to which the noble Earl had adverted in his speech. With regard to the foreign policy of the Government, he would only say, that it would be conducted upon the principles upon which it had been already conducted, having in view the securing the peace of Europe, by the formation of such alliances as the circumstances of the times, and the situation of this country and of Europe, might require. With regard to the principle of non-intervention, every one was agreed that it should be the rule, but still it must be admitted that there were exceptions to the rule. Perhaps, however, he was wrong in entering so far into the particulars into which the noble Earl had gone. If the noble Earl felt, that his Majesty's Government had done anything wrong, or that they were pursuing a wrong course, he could bring the matter by Motion before the House, and it would be then for his Majesty's Ministers to defend themselves against the noble Earl's charges. If the noble Earl thought that the course of proceeding adopted by the Government should be changed, let him move an Address to the Crown to that effect, or let him move a Resolution of the House on the subject, and then it would be for his Majesty's Ministers to consider what it would be wise and prudent to say in reply to him. With regard to the internal policy of the Government, he would say, that it was their intention to uphold and maintain our institutions (he used the noble Earl's very words), at the same time adopting every well-considered reformation called for by the circumstances of the case, and demanded by the intelligent majority of the community. He conceived, that he had given a very clear and distinct answer to the questions of the noble Lord as regarded the foreign and domestic policy of the country. He had not accompanied that answer with observations in reply to those of the noble Lord, as he thought that such a course of proceeding was, to say the least of it, extremely inconvenient.
The Earl of Winchilseawas not satisfied with the noble Viscount's explanation. It was absurd to say the present was not a new Ministry, for it had been expressly stated in both Houses, the other day, that "Lord Grey's Government was at an end, and a new one in course of formation."
The Earl of Radnorrose to order. The noble Earl had set out with saying, he only wished to put a question or two; he had put two questions in a very lengthy speech, and had gained his answer; yet he had now got up again to address the House on the same subject, though a subject of very great importance was waiting the consideration of their Lordships.
The Marquess of Londonderrywished to ask, whether it was by the noble Viscount's orders, that certain vessels which had been armed and were about to be forwarded to Spain, had been arrested?
Viscount Melbournesaid, he did not know, as a matter of fact, that the circumstance mentioned by the noble Marquess had really occurred.
The subject was dropped.

POOR LAWS' AMENDMENT—COMMITTEE.
The House went into Committee on the Poor-laws' Amendment Bill.
On Clause 25 being proposed,
Lord Kenyonobjected to the arbitrary power given to the Commissioners, of consolidating parishes, as there were many cases in which there were parishes well-regulated, and with a small amount of Poor-rate, and it would be a hard case for such a parish to be mixed up with a parish where the rates were high and the affairs ill-managed. He should, therefore, propose, as an Amendment, that no parishes should be consolidated into a union without the written consent of a majority of the guardians of the poor and of the rate-payers in each district.
The Lord Chancellorwas not surprised that the noble Baron who was opposed to the fundamental principle of the Bill, should propose this Amendment. It was, however, anything but an Amendment, for it would have the effect of crippling the Bill in one of its most material features, and, in a great measure, of preventing that change by which it was intended to return to the old and salutary system, which taught every man to depend on his own industry, on his own resources, to despise and hate as much to be a pauper at all, as to be a pauper receiving relief in a workhouse. It was generally found, as appeared by the Report, that when a man said he could not find work, the reason was he had not made the experiment; and it was almost invariably the case, that after being in the workhouse a little time, labourers got, out, and contrived to find
470
work elsewhere. This was the effect of the workhouse system, which was the best feature in the Bill, for it tended to restore to the lower classes that natural tone of which the mal-administration of these laws had almost divested them. The system had been tried in several places on a small scale with the happiest effect.
Lord Falmouthsupported the Amendment. He concurred in the principles stated by his noble friend (Lord Kenyon). Parishes varied much in circumstances; and it would be doing much injury to some parishes if they were united with a neighbouring parish.
The Earl of Radnorsaid, that it was absurd to suppose the Commissioners would go into the country for the mere purpose of annoying and injuring one parish by joining it to another. There was no reason to suppose but that they would exercise their judgment in an impartial and proper manner.
Lord Falmouthhad no doubt they would: what he objected to was the principle.
The Earl of Winchilseasupported the clause, and was rather surprised that the noble Baron should oppose it, considering how nearly he was connected with an extensive parish (Mary-la-bonne), in which the system of setting paupers hard to work and giving them necessaries instead of money, had reduced a body of paupers demanding relief in one week from nine hundred to fifty.
Lord Wynfordhad no objection to the union of parishes, provided the parishes wished it, but their consent he considered indispensable, for it would be too bad to mix up a well-conducted and consequently prosperous parish, with an ill-conducted one. He was ready to admit, that the system of a union of parishes for the purpose of having one workhouse among them would be cheap; but many a thing was cheap which, so far from being desirable or proper, was most injurious to the country. And he was satisfied, that great evil would result from the intermixture of so many paupers together. There could be no question, that a great contamination of each other's morals would be the consequence. Paupers ought not to be so far removed from their friends as that they should not be able to visit them. The workhouses under the proposed Bill would, in fact, be several county prisons, in which paupers would be separated from

471
their friends. He thought that it ought to be left to the paupers themselves, provided they received the concurrence of the Magistrates, either to go to the workhouse, or to eat their meals at their own houses, or in the open air. That was the practice under the old law.
The Lord Chancellor: No, no.
Lord Wynford: Yes, yes.
The Duke of Buckingham here read an extract from the 2nd Geo. 2, confirming the statements of Lord Wynford.
Lord Wynfordresumed: He thought that if the Commissioners were to have the power to unite parishes, they ought also to have the power to dissolve such union when it was proved to be injurious. He repeated, that they ought to possess the power of dissolving, as well as of making unions, in order that they might be able to correct any evils which might be found in certain cases to result from uniting parishes together. He liked the old law, and they ought not to consent to any innovation in that law, unless the innovation could be proved to be an improvement. He would, therefore, support the Amendment of his noble friend.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that his noble and learned friend had completely misconceived the import of the observations which he had made, and also the object of the clause itself. The object of that clause was, to enable the Commissioners to unite a number of parishes together, which were too small to enable them to erect and support workhouses for themselves. His (the Lord Chancellor's) noble and learned friend had also completely mistaken the meaning of the 2nd George 2. There was no doubt that the Act in question gave the Magistrates the power of affording relief to paupers at their own houses. There was no doubt, he (the Lord Chancellor) repeated, that the Magistrates had the discretionary power of either sending paupers to the workhouses, or relieving them at their own houses; their Lordships all knew how that power had been abused. Wherever the power was exercised to advantage, that was the exception; the abuse of the power was the rule, and greatly had it been abused. His noble and learned friend had endeavoured to give the workhouse a bad name, which it certainly did not deserve, and which it certainly ought not to bear in the estimation of their Lordships. He could have no objection to his noble
472
and learned friend endeavouring to give the workhouse a bad name in the eyes of the paupers, because that might have the effect of impressing them with a horror of it, and consequently prove an inducement to them to do all they could to avoid it. But his noble and learned friend ought not to try to persuade their Lordships, that it deserved this bad name. His noble and learned friend had compared the workhouse, under the new system, to a great prison. The comparison was most unjust. There was all the difference in the world between a workhouse and a prison. Paupers were not compelled to enter the workhouse; they would go to it of their own freewill. It was different with regard to a prison. Men were obliged to go into it against their wills. Paupers could leave the workhouse when they liked; but men could not leave the prison when they liked. They were detained contrary to their inclinations; they could not get out of it. He wished that the noble and learned Lord would exert his eloquence, as he had already stated, against the workhouse, in the eyes of paupers, so as to prevent them going into it. His noble and learned friend's imagination had run away with him, and he had attributed to the Bill what was not to be found in it.
Lord Wynfordexplained. It was not to workhouses generally he objected, but to those forced unions. Workhouses were very useful in particular parishes. The Bill gave the same discretionary power to the Commissioners as the Magistrates enjoyed before.
Lord Ellenboroughsaid, they must leave this clause in the Bill as it stood, if the object were to produce cheapness in the administration of the Poor-laws. With this view it would be necessary to give the Commissioners the power of uniting parishes. He thought that, in all cases above and under a certain age, children and infirm persons ought to be entitled to relief out of the workhouse at the discretion of the Magistrates of the district.
The Duke of Wellingtonthought the question a very simple one. It was, whether parishes should be compelled to unite whether they liked it or not, without the consent of the guardians of the poor. He thought, that the establishment of workhouses, in the manner proposed, would tend to ameliorate the system. In many parishes there was not, at present, the means of erecting a work-

473
house, and those parishes could never have the advantage of one without uniting with other parishes.
The Lord Chancellor: There are 600 parishes that do not average a population of more than 300 souls each, and 9,000 parishes that do not average more than 500.
The Duke of Wellington: It was clear from this that, if the Magistrates considered a workhouse necessary, it could only be erected in any particular district by a union of parishes.
The Marquess of Lansdownadmitted, that the power it was proposed to grant to the Commissioners could only be justified by necessity; but that necessity being made out, as he thought it was, by the Report of the Commissioners, he could not see why they should not have the power of disuniting as well as of uniting parishes without the sanction of the guardians of the poor. If the necessity for constructing a workhouse for different parishes were made out, there was no other means of erecting it except under the power given by this clause. There was an instance of a parish in Gloucestershire, the administration of which was excellent; but the adjoining parishes refused to unite and afford the means of erecting a workhouse; and there was no power to compel them, except by the provisions of this Act. The Commissioners would, of course, in the union of parishes, take the opportunity of availing themselves of the large workhouses already constructed, and classify the parishes accordingly. It had been said, that the erection of workhouses would drive persons out of the parishes in which they were built; but, if it even had that effect, would not this be a stimulus to those persons to look out for work to avoid the workhouse?
The Duke of Buckinghamwished to know, if there was any objection to limit the space for which each workhouse should be built.
The Lord Chancellorwas rather in favour of a limited distance than any particular number of parishes; for instance, say a circumference of ten or twelve miles.
The Amendment was negatived.
Lord Ellenboroughsaid, he was desirous of introducing here a clause which he thought their Lordships would not feel much difficulty in agreeing to. It was to this effect:—"That it may be lawful for any two Magistrates acting within any
474
city, borough, or hamlet, to direct that relief shall be given to any child under the age of three years, or to any infirm or aged persons above sixty years, without compelling such persons to reside in the workhouse, any rule or order of the Commissioners to the contrary notwithstanding." He was sure their Lordships would see how cruel and unnatural it must be to separate mother and child, or husband and wife, at an advanced age. He should not be surprised, if such violence to the feelings of persons in such tender relation to each other were to cause an insurrection. He hoped, therefore, their Lordships would see the advantage, and, indeed, the humanity of adopting the clause.
The Earl of Radnorthought, that it would be better to give the power to the Commissioners than to the Magistrates.
Lord Ellenboroughsaid, that he thought the Magistrates were the most proper persons, as the Commissioners would not have the power to delegate any authority. He named the age of three years for a child, because he considered it much more natural and proper that an infant of that age should be under the care of its parents than in the care of a mercenary nurse.
Viscount Melbournehad a strong objection to that part of the clause proposed by the noble Baron, which went to relieve children out of the workhouse, because it was totally at variance with the general principle of the Bill; and, besides, parents were obliged by law to support their children, even to the grandfather and grandmother. There was also another objection. A child of such tender years could claim no relief for itself; the application must be from the parents.
Lord Ellenboroughwas disposed, after what had fallen from the noble Viscount opposite, to consent that that part of the clause, which applied to children, should be omitted.
The Clause, with this omission, was agreed to.
On clause 40, relating to the instruction of paupers in workhouses, having been proposed,
The Archbishop of Canterburyproposed an Amendment to the effect "that all workhouses should be under the care and superintendence of the Curate or Vicar of the respective parishes in which such workhouses were situated, and that the said Vicars or Curates might visit such

475
workhouses at all proper times, for the purpose of affording religious instruction to such of the inmates as professed the Established Religion, provided, that no pauper be obliged to attend divine worship contrary to the religious belief in which he or she had been brought up; nor should any child in the workhouse be instructed in the creed of any particular religion against the wishes or feelings of the natural parents or guardians of such child."
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that the Amendment proposed by the most reverend Prelate appeared to him to embrace every object that was necessary.
The Archbishop of Canterburywould have no objection to add to the Amendment, "that the workhouses should be open always to clergymen not of the Established Church."
The Clause and Amendment were postponed.
The Clauses to the 51st were agreed to. The House resumed.