Sitting of 6 May 1836

MINUTES.
Read a first time:—Small Debts' (Scotland); Petty Sessions' (Ireland).
Petitions presented. By several HON. MEMBERS, from various Places, for the Repeal of the Duty on Newspapers.—By Mr. WILLIAM ROCHE, from Inniscarra and Mathela, for the Abolition of Tithes (Ireland).—By Mr. HORACE TWISS, from Bridport, for the Repeal of the Legacy Duty on Charitable Bequests.—By the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, from Edinburgh, for the Repeal of the Duty on Church Building Materials.—By Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT and Mr. ROBERT WALLACE, from Exeter and Greenock, for the Repeal of the Duty on Fire Insurances.—By Mr. W. S. O'BRIEN, from Limerick, to Allow a Drawback on the Importation of Class into Ireland.—By Mr. EIVART, from Liverpool, for the Repeal of the Duty on Stamp Receipts.

PARLETHORPE CHAPELRY.
Mr. Granville Vernonmoved the second reading of the Parlethorpe Chapelry Bill.
Colonel Sibthorpeopposed the Bill. He designated this as an attempt to smuggle a private Bill through that House, which would have the effect of wresting from the rector, the Dean of Lincoln, without the sanction or colour of law, under the specious pretext of an endowment, the right t which he possessed in the chapelry, which

631
would devolve on Earl Manvers, who previously had obtained the sanction of his relative, the Archbishop of York, for so doing. It was an infringement on the right of Church property of the most dangerous description—that of converting it to private purposes; an infringement which he called on the House not to sanction, and on that ground he claimed their support in the amendment which he would propose, that the Bill be read a second time that day six months.
Mr. Granville Vernonsaid, that it would be much more agreeable to him to abstain from introducing any personal allusions in supporting this measure, but the hon. Member for Lincoln had rendered it necessary that he (Mr. Vernon) should go into some of the details in vindication of the character of the noble Lord (Manvers) who had proposed to effect this endowment. The noble Lord did not seek for any benefit to himself, nor to divest the Vicar of Edwinstowe of any of his present or contingent income, which he was entitled to by law. He was desirous of promoting the efficiency of the Church, by securing weekly services in a chapel in which, by law, there was only provision for alternate duty. He (Mr. Vernon) was grieved to learn that the opposition to this splendid proposal should proceed from a dignitary of the Church, he alluded to the Dean of Lincoln, the patron; the incumbent, who is his son, having in the first instance acquiesced in the duty being performed by Lord Manvers's chaplain. Therefore, no scruples could have existed in that quarter as to parting with the cure of souls of one hundred persons out of the 2,000 with whose charge he was originally intrusted. He (Mr. Vernon) believed that the apprehension which the Dean entertained was this, that if a new benefice was created, the time might arrive when persons would inquire how it happened that the tithes of that township had gotten into the pocket of the Dean of Lincoln and the vicar of another benefice; and as there was a disposition, on the part of the real friends of the Church to apply the surplus incomes of chapters to promote religious services in the districts from which the revenues were derived, he might fear that something would spring up to prevent the appropriation of those funds. The hon. Member for Lincoln had stated that this Bill was in contravention of an Act of Parliament, in which he was mistaken. He (Mr. Vernon) contended that the patron and incumbent would be benefited by
632
this measure; for it exonerated the latter from the alternate duty in that chapel, which was one of three chapelries attached to a decayed church, and from which there had proceeded many memorials to the Archbishop, complaining of the inefficient discharge of divine service. It was impossible for one incumbent to do justice to all the duties. The delay of bringing forward this question arose from a disinclination to drag before the public circumstances so discreditable to the Church; and a hope was entertained that, through the intervention of friends, the Dean would have conceded the point; and, moreover, it was held out that he would endow the chapelry out of the chapter funds. He (Mr. Vernon) should have approved of this so much, that he would not have proceeded with a private Bill in contravention of such an object; but in that he was disappointed, and no other alternative was left. The Archbishop—who was acting on the commission for extending more widely the services of the Church—accepted the proposal of Lord Manvers, and earnestly recommended it to the consent of the incumbent, who had referred himself in his answer to the pleasure of his patron. With all these facts before him, he would not shrink from facing the Gallant Officer's amendment.
Mr. Evelyn Denisoconfirmed the statement of the hon. Member who spoke last. According to his (Mr. Denison's) notion, the Gallant Officer, the Member for Lincoln, had not sufficiently informed himself of the facts of the case to enable him to make a clear or satisfactory statement, in which he had signally failed. He would support the second reading.
Mr. Humewas much surprised that that which was a public question should be brought forward in the nature of a private Bill. It appeared strange to him to hear of individuals being so liberal, and of hon. Gentlemen now coming forward to prop the Church. It was also rather strange to see the noble Lord (Manvers) and the Archbishop of York opposing the views of the vicar and incumbent. He (Mr. Hume) was of opinion that the opposition of the gallant Officer to this Bill was well founded; for if the noble Lord succeeded in the endowment, there was nothing to prevent him from coming forward hereafter and claiming compensation. Why not the Commissioners come forward and report to that House what ought to be done? He hoped the Bill would not proceed further.
Mr. Thomas Duncombeconsidered the Bill as calculated to form a new district, and consequently the Church should defray the expenses. He trusted the Bill would he thrown out.
Mr. Galley Knightsupported the motion, and defended the generous proposition of the noble Earl (Manvers), by whose liberality in the cause of religion the Church would be a gainer of 100 l a year. He would cordially support the Bill.
Colonel Sibthorpeonly discharged what he deemed to be his duty in the part he took in opposing this measure, but he disclaimed all want of proper feeling towards the noble Lord.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. The House divided, Ayes 71; Noes 54; Majority—17.
Bill read a second time.

THE TEA TRADE.
Mr. Grotepresented a petition from a number of persons interested in the tea trade, and begged to put a question, founded on the petition, to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The House was aware that all teas arriving after 1st July next would be subject to the equal duty of 2s. 1d. per 1b. The quantity of Bohea imported, he was sorry to say, was unusually great, and the loss upon it, therefore would be very considerable. He had been intrusted by the petitioners, comprising the principal persons in the tea trade, to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it would not be possible to afford them some relief?
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that this topic had been recently brought under the consideration of the House when he had stated the course he was prepared to pursue. The facts were in a very narrow compass. By the alteration made in the tea-duties last year, all teas imported after the 1st July next were to be admitted at an equal duty of 2s. 1d. per pound: up to the 1st July the old duty would continue in operation. Of this change in the law all parties had knowledge, not by a Treasury intimation, but by a positive Act of Parliament. It so happened, however, that the quantity of Bohea teas imported, and about to be imported, infinitely exceeded the calculation; and under these circumstances, certain parties had applied to the Treasury to be allowed to take their bonded Bohea teas out of the warehouses after the 1st July, at the lower rate of duty. His reply had been that the Treasury had no power, and that Parliament alone could give the parties relief, if due ground were shown.
634
They represented how seriously they should be injured, and some of them, perhaps, altogether ruined; but still he felt that he could do nothing but refuse acquiescence. They stated further, that there were no adverse interests to be damnified by a relaxation of the law, and that importers and dealers were all agreed upon the point. He had, therefore, moved for copies of the memorial to the lords of the Treasury, in order to call the attention of all persons to the pending question; and undoubtedly he had received intimations, not very numerously signed, nor from many places, showing that to comply with what was required would be injurious and inconvenient. He wished it to be distinctly understood that on revenue grounds he did not oppose the object of the memorialists: he should make no objection, as Finance Minister, to any relaxation; but he saw very good reason for not altering the existing law upon insufficient grounds and ex parte statements. No alteration could be required till the 1st of July, and in the mean time the papers before the House would be printed and circulated. The hon. Member would excuse him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) if, on the present occasion, he did not give a distinct reply to the question. He was anxious first to ascertain whether there were or were not any adverse interests. It was a subject not involved in the finance statement he was about to make; but at all events he intended to reserve himself respecting it until he should be able to ascertain whether any, and what, parties would be injured or affected by the introduction of a measure to accomplish the wishes of the petitioners.

SUGAR FROM BEET-ROOT.
Dr. Bow-ringput a question respecting the manufacture of Sugar from Beet-root—a process which he understood had lately been brought into this country. He wished to know whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer was acquainted with the fact, and whether he did not think that success in such an experiment would be attended with the most injurious consequences? If it succeeded, it might be necessary, as had been the case with the recent cultivation of tobacco, to pluck up the beetroot by the roots.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerreplied, that he had heard of such an experiment, and that the result had been a most signal failure.

The Budget.
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Ways and Means,
The Chancellor of the Exchequerrose and said: Sir, when it fell to my lot, in the course of the last Session, to make a statement of the financial condition of the country, I was listened to with great, though undeserved, kindness and attention. That indulgence I could only attribute to the consideration shown to one who, for the first time, undertakes such a task, and enters upon his duties as Minister of Finance under most arduous and peculiar circumstances. On the present occasion, I am aware that I cannot advance any claims to a similar indulgence. I know it will be justly considered that if, in the interval that has since passed, I possess and have exerted diligence to seek, and industry to arrange, the materials necessary for a financial statement, I ought now to come before the House fully prepared for the performance of this important duty. While I admit the justice of this principle as swaying the minds of those whom I address, I cannot but feel that this conviction still increases my embarrassment. I have, however, one encouragement. In the statement which I am about to make I am assured of the facts of the case; and if I should be able to lay that statement before the Committee in a simple and intelligible manner, though I cannot offer any greater claims to its attention than the patient industry with which I have collected my materials, and the clearness with which I state them, I feel confident that I shall be as able as I shall be ready to explain any points on which explanation may be required. The course which I propose to pursue on this occasion is—to state, first, the income and expenditure of the last, and the anticipated income and expenditure of the present year; and, secondly, to refer to the comparative amounts of the revenues of the Customs, Excise, Stamps, Post-office, and Taxes, in the two years; and to conclude by making such general observations—and they shall be as few as circumances will permit—as will indicate the internal state of the country. Having given such explanations, it will become my duty to show in what manner I am prepared to deal with any surplus that may be at the disposal of the House, and what are the taxes which I propose as subjects of modification, reduction, or repeal. The difficulties with which I have to deal in this latter part of my task are demonstrated by
636
the multitude of petitions for the repeal of taxes which have been presented to this House from all parts of the country. I dare not attempt to enumerate them, but I believe I am correct in stating that there is scarcely one existing tax for the repeal or reduction of which petitions have not been presented. I am sorry to be compelled to state that the finances of the country do not admit of a compliance with the prayer of very many of these petitions. It will be for the House to consider, in the first place, what is the amount of surplus revenue, after all the exigencies of the year have been provided for; and next, how that surplus can best be applied, and what tax it may be most expedient to repeal. It is admitted by one who is well acquainted with politics and mankind, that "to tax and to please, as to love and to be wise, is not given unto man." I must add, that the difficulty of imposing taxes is not so great as that of repealing one previous taxation. In proposing a new tax, there is generally only one class of objectors—that class whom the tax more particularly affects; but when we come to propose a repeal of a tax, then various contending classes of the community come forward, each prefers its particular claim for relief, and the conflict is fierce and formidable. We see the agriculturists arrayed in argument, though I hope not in interest, against the manufacturers; the manufacturers, in their turn, claiming relief in preference to the landholder; the inhabitants of cities and towns asserting that they bear the chief burthen of direct taxation, and are entitled to immediate attention; the trader and manufacturer soliciting the remission of those duties which repress the productive industry of the community. In a word, it is when we come to consider the repeal of a tax, that the great difficulty of finance appears. On former occasions, in financial statements it was usual—and I think it was prudent so to do—to refer to the financial transactions of past years, and to show the effects of former reductions and economical resources. I will not go over ground which I have already trod for this purpose. It is true that our duty should lead us to consider the reduction of expenditure, before we come to the reduction of taxation. Such reduction of expenditure is one of the first duties of a Government, and on it the repeal of taxation can most safely be based. I will not, I repeat, trouble the House, by re-

637
ferring to the reductions made by the present Government, and that of Lord Grey in former years. These I have stated on former occasions, and I presume that those statements are still in the recollection of the House. The reductions made by the Whig Ministry are, I trust, at least, in the recollection of hon. Members on this side of the House, and cannot be undervalued even by those who are opposed to us. But there has been presented to Parliament, during the present Session, one document to which I cannot avoid adverting. It is a Return that has been laid on the Table of the House, not on my motion, and, therefore, it cannot be considered as prepared for the occasion; the Return I allude to was made on the motion of the hon. and and gallant Member for the city of Lincoln. I thank him for the evidence he has supplied—for the opportunity he has afforded me of calling the attention of the House to the facts contained in that most important account. I do not advert to it as claiming, for my side of the House, the exclusive merit of the reductions there shown; for I admit that hon. Gentlemen opposite are fully entitled to their share of the public approbation. Again thanking the hon. and gallant Officer for the opportunity he has afforded me, I proceed to call the attention of the House to some important general results. It appears from the Return, which I hold in my hand, that in the year 1815, the establishment of the several public departments consisted of 27,365 persons, whose salaries amounted to 3,763,300 l. In the year 1835, the number of persons employed in the same departments had been reduced to 23,578, and the salaries to 2,786,000 l.; showing a reduction of 3,797 in the number of persons employed, and a reduction of salaries to the amount of 976,000 l. Though I do not mean to enter into any minute analysis of this account, I may be allowed to point the attention of the Committee to the several departments in which the most considerable reductions have been made. In the Treasury, the annual reductions have amounted to 27,000 l.; and by a Bill which was brought in under Earl Grey's Government, of which my right hon. Friend, the Member for Cumberland, had the charge, a further annual reduction has been made in the charge of the Exchequer, to the amount of 58,000 l. In the War-Office the reduction has been
638
29,000 l.; in the Ordnance, 122,000 l., in the Admiralty and Navy Offices, 30,300 l.; in the Excise, 152,000 l.; in the Stamps and Tax-Office, 1,031 l.;; in the Audit-Office, 54,000 l.; in the Vice-Treasurer's Office, (Ireland,) 23,000 l. I do not mention this with the view of showing that all has been done in the way of reduction which can be done; on the contrary, I do it for the purpose of showing to the people of this country, that much has been already effected, and to encourage the House and the Government, the one to demand and the other to carry into effect, all practicable retrenchment, seeing that what has been already done in that way, has been effected without any detriment to the public service. But I hope, however, the House will see that the more that has been done in the way of reduction, the more difficult is it to effect what yet remains to do. The Government do not mean to shrink from this difficulty; and if any further reductions in the public departments, in the collection of the revenue, or in any branch of the public service, can be carried forward, the House may depend upon it that they will be effected. I now proceed to the detail of the income and expenditure; and, in the first place, to compare the estimate I made in August last, of the income of the present year, with the actual receipts of this year, closing with the 5th of April last. I do not adopt this course from any personal motive, or to claim any credit for the accuracy of my calculations; but it is necessary that the House should know whether the statements I then made are proved to have rested upon sufficient data, and were not lightly hazarded; in order that the public may judge how far they can rely on the probable accuracy of my future calculations, and on the estimate I form of the income and expenditure of the current year. I last year estimated the amount of the Customs' revenue of this year at 20,000,000 l. The receipt has been no less than 20,550,000 l.; thus exceeding my estimate more than 500,000 l. The Excise was estimated at 13,270,000 l.; the receipts amount to 13,440,000 l.; making an increase of 170,000 l. in that branch. I estimated the Stamps at 6,980,000 l.; the Exchequer payments have been 7,051,000 l.; making an increase beyond my estimate of 71,000 l. The Post-Office revenue I estimated at

639
1,500,000 l.; but the increase exceeds that estimate by 51,000 l. Taxes I estimated as likely to produce 3,600,000 l.; excess beyond that sum is 20,000 l. The Miscellaneous Estimates have fallen short by 24,000 l. of what I had anticipated. Thus, on the whole year, the receipts have exceeded the estimate by the sum of 830,000 l. I have made this statement to show, that if I calculate the revenue of the next year on the same data, the House may not suspect that I take an exaggerated view of our present and future resources. I hope, then, that assuming the present state of the country to continue undisturbed—and on this subject I shall make some remarks hereafter—the Committee would not be in error in giving credit to the estimate I am about to state for the next year. I shall now proceed to compare my estimate of the expenditure of the year with the actual payments. I calculated the charges on the Consolidated Fund, and the interest of the public debt, exclusive of the West-India compensation, at 30,580,000 l.; but the actual expenditure has been 30,714,000 l.; making an excess beyond the estimate, of 134,000 l.; the whole of which excess is capable of explanation. The estimated expense of the army was 6,189,000 l.; the actual expenditure was 6,481,000 l.; being an excess, above the estimate, of 292,000 l. This excess arose out of the fact, that the payments made within the year are not always payments for the service of the year. Sometimes there is an overlapping of last year's vote to be defrayed; and at others there is an anticipation of the expenditure of the year ensuing. Since 1831, also, there have been no votes for army extraordinaries—a change which has been of considerable public advantage, and which has brought the whole financial accounts more minutely under the consideration of the House; but in consequence of this change, it sometimes becomes necessary that advances should be made for civil purposes out of the military chest in the colonies, to be repaid out of the miscellaneous vote; and this makes the expenditure of the military department appear greater than it really is. For instance—an advance has been made out of the military chest in the last year for the maintenance of convicts in New South Wales; but this sum will hereafter be re-paid out of the votes for convict purposes, But to proceed: the estimated expense
640
of the navy last year was 4,245,000 l., but the actual expenditure has been within that sum by 4,099 l. The estimate for the Ordnance was 1,296,000 l.; the expenditure has been 1,273,000 l., the expenditure being less than the estimate by the sum of 23,000 l. The estimate of the miscellaneous expenditure was 2,405,000 l.; the actual expenditure does not exceed 2,202,000 l. On the whole of the expenditure there has been an excess above the estimate of 80,000 l. Such is the comparison between the estimated income and expenditure of last year, and the actual result of both in that year. I will now proceed to make a comparison of the receipts of last year, with the estimated receipt and expenditure of the present, still excluding the charges incurred by reason of the compensation to the owners of slaves. I have already shown that the receipts of last year amounted to 46,381,000 l. I am enabled to calculate, and I hope I shall be able to justify the estimate, that the income of the present year, supposing that no alteration were made in taxation, would amount to 46,980,000 l., showing an excess in the income of the present, as compared with the last year, of 599,900 l.; or, in round numbers, 600,000 l. The charge on the Consolidated Fund, and the interest of the National Debt, amounted last year to 30,714,000 l. I estimate the amount this year at 30,620,000 l., exclusive of the West-India loan in both cases. The army expenditure last year was 6,481,000 l.; in the present year I estimate it at 6,327,000 l. The navy last year was 4,098,000 l.; this year, from political reasons which my noble Friend, the Secretary of State, has explained on former occasions to the House, there has been an increase in the navy to the amount of 434,000 l.; thus raising the estimate of the year to 4,532,000 l. The Ordnance Estimate last year was 1,273,000 l.; in the present I estimate it at 1,263,000 l. Last year the miscellaneous services amounted to 2,202,000 l.; this year I estimate that branch of expenditure at 2,461,000 l. This will show an increase of 420,000 l., (exclusive of the West-India loan) on the expenditure of the whole year. I shall now endeavour to combine the results of the statements I have made, so as to bring the whole into the simplest and most intelligible form. The total income estimated for 1836 and 1837, was 46,980,000 l.; the total expenditure for debt and other

641
charges on Consolidated Fund, exclusive of the charge for West-India Loan, 30,620,000 l.; the supplies for 1836 and 1837, 14,585,807 l.; total expenditure, exclusive of charge for West-India Loan, 45,205,807 l.; exhibiting a surplus of 1,774,193 l. Gentlemen who have listened to this statement will no doubt rejoice—no one could desire more sincerely than myself—that such a disposable surplus existed. But such is not the case. The Legislature, having performed a great act of justice in providing compensation for the owners of the emancipated slaves, it has added 20,000,000 l. to our debt, and it cannot have provided for the interest on the sum due to the planter, and at the same time have so large a surplus of revenue applicable to relief from taxation. With respect to the West-India Loan, I have, on various occasions, stated the liabilities which it has entailed on the country; and the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for the University of Cambridge, will recollect that in the course of last year, when he asked some questions concerning it, I gave him an account not only of our full liabilities, but of the amount we might be called on to pay in the course of the year. On that occasion, I stated, that if the whole amount were to be called for within the year, so far from there being any available surplus, there would be, on the contrary a deficiency. But I also stated, on that occasion, (and the House seemed to be satisfied with the declaration,) that I should make provision only for what were likely to be the probable demands upon the public. It was after making such provision, that I struck my balance, and stated the surplus which might be brought under the consideration of the House, with a view to the repeal of taxes. I mean to pursue the same course on the present occasion. The House is aware, that provision is yet to be made for compensation to the slave-owners of the Mauritius, and of the Cape of Good Hope; and that there further remains unsatisfied the difference between the sum of 15,000,000 l., the nominal amount of the loan, and the actual amount received after deducting the discount. There is, also, a certain proportion of interest on claims not as yet admitted to adjudication. The maximum amount to be provided for, supposing the loan of the Mauritius and the Cape to be completed—supposing all demands liquidated, including the interest
642
on claims outstanding for adjudication, as well as on those which have not, as yet, been put in—supposing, in fact, that whole interest were to be cleared up and paid off, in full, the utmost amount claimable in the year would be 1,454,604 l. On the best consideration which I can give the subject, the actual payment which will be demanded, on the score of interest, I calculate to be 1,111,863 l.; and I propose out of the surplus of 1,774,193 l.; to make provision for this sum of 1,111,863 l.; which I have every reason to believe will be the highest amount that can be demanded. I am thus bound to state, that the whole amount of surplus, over which Parliament is entitled to exercise any dominion, amounts to a sum not exceeding 662,330 l. Gentlemen who think that we can apply a large surplus to the reduction of taxation, will do well to bear in mind this fact; they will be pleased to remember, that making a just provision for the engagements and services of the country, we cannot have a larger disposable surplus than 662,330 l. Having said this much, I shall now call the attention of the House to the various branches of the income of the country, in order to enable the House to judge whether the calculations I have made are correct. I first examine the Customs' revenue, which I have calculated as likely to produce the same amount as the previous year. Let us consider the consumption of coffee, and the revenue produced from that article. The quantity which I last year estimated was 23,143,000 lbs.; but the actual amount of the year's consumption was 23,623,000 lbs. The consumption which I estimate for the year 1837 is 23,251,000 lbs. This I take as the average of the two years. In the article of sugar, I estimated, in 1835, the consumption for 1836 at 3,726,000 cwts.; the actual consumption has been 3,745,000 cwts. I assume the probable consumption of this year to be the same as the last. I estimated the consumption of tea at 36,000,000 lbs.; the actual consumption has been 37,099,000 lbs. The consumption of the year 1836 and 1837 I calculate at 38,000,000 lbs. This is an increase on which I trust that I am justified in reckoning; it is founded on the very considerable increase which has taken place in the consumption of that article. I am well aware, that, in discharging this branch of his duties, the Finance Minister is bound to avoid all exaggerated statements; and however great the desire on the part of that

643
Minister to reduce taxes—as prudence demands that he should not justify such a proceeding by an over-statement of the probable future income of the country, so he is bound neither to gratify himself nor his friends by a proposition to repeal taxes, which the result may not enable him to realize. I shall next call the attention of the Committee to a more general view of the Customs' duties, as an indication of the general state of the commerce of the country; but I must caution the Committee against allowing the present condition of that commerce to betray them into any excess of confidence. I am well aware that nothing is more dangerous to a community like our's than the speculation and rashness which arises from a misplaced confidence in the continuance of a period of almost unexampled prosperity; it therefore requires the greatest caution and prudence in touching upon this subject. In making a statement of the finances of the country, I hope I may neither depart, nor encourage others to depart, from that calm and patient anticipation of futurity, which it behoves all, and more particularly a Finance Minister, to adhere to. This caution

Imports and Exports in the last Eight Years, at official Rates, and at declared Value.

YEARS

Value of Imports into the United Kingdom.

Value of Exports From the United Kingdom. Official Rates.

Value of the Produce and Manufactures of the United Kingdom, exported, according to the real or declared value.

Official Rates.

Produce and Manufactures of the United Kingdom.

Foreign and Colonial Merchandize.

Total Exports.

1828

45,028,805

52,797,455

9,946,545

62,744,000

36,814,176

1829

43,981,317

56,213,041

10,622,402

66,835,444

25,830,649

1830

46,245,241

61,140,864

8,550,437

69,691,302

38,251,502

1831

49,713,889

60,683,933

10,745,071

71,429,004

37,163,647

184,969,252

230,835,293

39,864,455

270,699,750

148,059,974

Average

46,242,313

57,708,823

9,966,113

67,674,937

37,014,993

1832

44,586,741

65,026,702

11,044,869

76,071,572

36,444,524

1833

45,952,551

69,989,339

9,833,753

79,823,093

39,667,347

1834

49,362,811

73,831,550

11,562,036

85,393,587

41,649,191

1835

48,911,542

78,376,731

12,797,724

91,174,456

47,372,270

188,813,645

287,224,322

45,238,382

332,462,208

165,133,332

Average.

47,203,411

71,806,080

11,309,595

83,115,552

41,280,833

Increase on Comparison of two averages.

961,098

14,097,257

1,343,482

15,440,615

4,265,840

more particularly applies to the commercial public. Whilst we look at the prosperous state of the commerce of the country, we should also observe the signs of the times: the public should not be led away by a knowledge of our present prosperity, to embark recklessly in inconsiderate schemes and wild speculations, such as we see in the present day multiplying around us, not only in the metropolis, but in every city, town—I might almost add, in every village,—of the kingdom. Having given this caution, I will now proceed to remark upon the principal points which indicate the state of the commerce of the country, and for which I think we have reason to be grateful. I hold in my hand a paper which exhibits a comparative state of the trade of the country, from the year 1828 to the ea r 1831, and from the commencement of 1832 to the close of 1835. I beg the attention of the Committee to this document, which shows the official value of the imports, distinguishing the produce of the United Kingdom from that of our colonies and of foreign countries. I shall afterwards have occasion to refer to the declared value of our imports and exports.
On former occasions, when the Returns of official value were referred to, we frequently heard a fallacious but a popular objection raised to our statements. We were told that we only proved an increase of quantities, and that an increase of quantities might take place contemporaneously, with a fall in prices, and with a losing trade. I do not stop to expose this fallacy, but I may be permitted to observe, that the accounts before me not only exhibit a large increase in quantity,

BRITISH PRODUCE AND MANUFACTURES EXPORTED.
Declared Value.

1834

£.36,531,000

1335

41,350,000

£.4,819,000

Increase 13 per cent.

LINEN MANUFACTURES.

1834

£.2,579,000

1835

3,226,000

647,000

Increase 26 per cent.

COTTON.

1834

£.15,302,000

1835

16,394,000

£.1,092,000

Increase 7 per cent.

HARDWARE AND CUTLERY.

1834

£.1,485,000

1835

1,835,000

£.350,000

Increase 23 per cent.

SILK.

1834

£.637,000

1835

972,000

£.335,000

Increase 6 per cent.

WOOLLEN.

1834

£.5,975,000

1835

7,046,000

£.1,071,000

Increase 18 per cent.

Out of the seventeen articles of export, which might be enumerated, there has been an increase on fourteen. The only articles on which there has been any decrease, and that but to a trifling extent, are tin, salt, and refined sugar; But let not the state of our commerce be judged of by our exports alone; the increased
but also an increase in declared value, amounting to no less a sum than 4,265,840 l. Hon. Gentlemen will, perhaps, think with me, that the most sanguine expectations could not have anticipated a state of commercial prosperity greater than this. I shall proceed to refer to the great branches of industry throughout the country, and I am enabled to show how this great export-trade has been distributed amongst them:—
demand for our produce in foreign countries must ever re-act upon the home-market, and produce there an increased consumption of articles of foreign import. Let us, therefore, examine the state of the import trade. Let us first consider the importation of cotton-wool.

COTTON WOOL FOR HOME-CONSUMPTION.

1833

293,682,000 lbs.

1834

302,935,000

1835

333,080,000

The capital invested in buildings and machinery amounts to 4,000,000 l., calculated to give employment to 90,000 per-

IRON AND STEEL.

Declared value exported.

1833

£.1,405,035

1834

1,406,872

1835

1,680,750

Increase 19½ per cent.

As an illustration of the demand for iron abroad, and the enormous power of production in this country, I may be permitted to mention that an order was received on the 6th of May last, at one manufactory, for 1,800 tons of iron railway for America. That order was executed before the month of September, without derangement to the other business of the establishment, and by that time there were manufactured and exported iron rails sufficient to lay down a railroad 57½ English miles. It is true, that in some articles of our Customs there has been a slight falling-off. I pass over this part of the subject lightly, for the falling-off may, in all cases, be easily accounted for, by

INCREASE OF HOME-MADE SPIRITS, ACCOUNTING FOR. DECREASE OF BRANDY.

1834

£.21,874,000

1835

23,397,000

1836

24,710,000

Brandy, April 5, 1834

1,634,000

1835

1,589,000

1836

1,487,000

Estimate for 1837

1,537,000

It is impossible to look at these Returns without noticing the fact, that as we have advanced in sound commercial and financial policy, in the same proportion have
sons. The following Table gives the result of our iron trade:—
any person who will take the trouble of investigating the subject. For instance, there is a falling-off in the article of foreign brandy. One cause is, undoubtedly, that the duty on foreign brandy is at present extravagantly high. That duty, if it can be defended at all, is to be justified only as a protection to the distiller of home spirits, and to the grower of barley.' But this is a reason, and not a justification. But we may account for the reduced import of brandy on other grounds. While the consumption of foreign brandy has decreased, the consumption of homemade spirits has largely increased, as the following table will show:—
our commercial and financial interests been marked by prosperity. In a very few words I may venture to refer to certain articles as illustrative of that com-

649
mercial policy which has so often been questioned, and made a matter of grave dispute in this House, Let me take, as an example, the article of gloves. Let us see whether the adoption of a more liberal policy in the case of this article of manufacture has been attended by loss to the home manufacturer, or whether it has not had precisely a contrary effect. A few examples derived from the glove-trade and from other trades of a similar description, will show how the new "principles of free-trade,'' as they are called, have worked. I will call them the principles of Mr. Huskisson—for Mr. Huskisson was the Minister who advocated, with the greatest force and power, the great political truths on which true commercial policy should be founded. He was the Statesman with whom originated that commercial system, on which, for some years past, the Government and the Parliament of England have been steadily and fortunately acting. To return to the glove-trade. I beg leave to remind the House how often it was predicted that the result of a free trade in foreign gloves would be the destruction of the British manufacturer. Now, on comparing the importation of foreign gloves for each of the last two years, it appears that the number of pairs of foreign gloves imported has been reduced from 1,603,000 to 1,290,000; shewing a decrease of 313,000. Coincident, however, with this decrease, the importation of kid skins, out of which gloves are manufactured, has augmented, so as to give a great stimulus to that very trade, the ruin of which was anticipated. In 1834, there were imported 181,000 undressed, and 617,000 dressed kid-skins, making a total of 798,000 skins altogether. In 1835, the number of undressed skins was 235,000, and of dressed 791,000; making a total of 1,044,000, and showing an increase in the year, of 246,000 skins. In a word, by the system we have pursued, the importation of the manufactured article has decreased, whilst, from the ascertained fact of an increased and increasing importation of the raw material, we are able to deduce the satisfactory conclusion, that the industry of the country in this very article is greatly augmenting. The only other illustration of this principle with which I shall trouble the Committee is one derived from the silk trade—that trade which we are told was to be entirely crushed by the policy we
650
have adopted. Now let us consider what has been the condition of the silk trade of late years; and, contrasting that condition with the state in which we now find it, let us see how the forebodings of those who are opposed to our views have been realized. Upon comparing the Returns of the importation of raw silk in the years 1834 and 1835, what do we find to be the result? In 1834, the quantity of raw silk imported was 3,346,0001bs.; of waste, l,009,0001bs; and of thrown, 185,0001bs.; making a total of 4,540,0001bs. In 1835, the quantity of raw silk was 4,151,0001bs.; of waste, 1,382,0001bs.; and of thrown, 254,0001bs.; making a totalof5,787,000Ibs. and showing, in the year, an increase of l,267,0001bs.: and at the same time it should be observed, that there has been a decrease in the amount of the ad valorem duties received on the manufactured silks imported. This state of trade proves, that the alteration of the law has, instead of ending, as was anticipated, in the ruin of the English silk manufacturer, been of essential service to him. In 1834, the amount of duties on manufactured silks imported was 188,000 l. whereas in 1835, it was only 165,000 l. Thus we find, as the result of the altered system—of that calumniated system of less restricted intercourse—an increased importation of the raw material, which necessarily implies increased employment at home, and a diminished importation of the foreign manufactured article. I might show, by the like means, that with regard to foreign wines and other articles, the whole of the principle upon which we proceed has been borne out by the result. I observe my hon. Friend, the Member for Worcester, differs from me on this point. [Mr. Robinson: In the case of French wines.] I believe they constitute no exception from my statement. I have not by me, at this moment, the Return, but my impression is, that the result, as regards French wines, is precisely the same as that of the other articles I have particularised. I am prepared to show, more generally, from a review of the accounts of the last four years, that the reductions which have been made during that time in the Customs' duties have been wisely and judiciously made. I am prepared to show, that though we have lost upon those articles on which the duties have been reduced during the two first years that have followed the reduction, we have gained upon them during

651
the two last, and have thus actually added to the receipts of the Exchequer, not by the increase, but by the reduction of duties. I cannot quit this subject without alluding to the increased amount of Customs' duties collected in Ireland, as evinced by the Returns from the most important ports in that country. We ought not to exclude the amount of Customs levied in Ireland from our consideration on the present occasion, more especially as the increase in

Year ending Jan. 1, 1833.

1834.

1835.

1836.

Belfast

£181,000

£ 194,000

£253,000

£319,000

Cork

149,000

l6l,000

166,081

186,600

Dublin

576,000

546,000

661,000

816,000

Limerick

90,000

97,000

115,000

128,000

Derry

56,000

56,000

72,000

85,000

Waterford

102,000

103,000

112,000

124,000

It is quite true, that in the latter year there is included a considerable importation of tea; but from this circumstance, as well as from the gratifying fact, that there has arisen now, from many of the Irish ports, a direct trade between Ireland and China—a matter which we, who took part in the discussion respecting the opening of that trade, never anticipated; from these, as well as many other circumstances, I derive the most satisfactory assurances that the condition of the Irish people is improving. I think the House will join with me in the conclusion, that upon this general statement there is great ground for gratitude and congratulation; but I cannot conclude my observations in respect to the Customs, without adverting to the reductions lately made in the expenses incurred in the collection of this branch of revenue. Upon this point I am happy in being able to say, considerable progress has been already made; and as a reduction of the expenses of the collection of the revenue is a matter which is most important to the public, I trust the Committee will excuse me if I claim their attention to the subject. It is often said, that it behoves this House to ask, on behalf of the public, for information on those branches of expenditure which are not annually voted by us. I concur entirely in the proposition, that the House has a right to demand such information; and it is with a view of giving it that I take the liberty of now stating some few details, to show the progress we have made on this head;—
the consumption of foreign articles marks the increased command over the luxuries of life enjoyed by the Irish people. If we can measure that increased power, we obtain some insight into the progress of comfort and civilization among the population of Ireland. The document I hold in my hand is a Return of the Customs' receipts in the principal Irish ports for the years ending 1833, 1834, 1835, and 1836. It is as follows:

EXPENSE OF COLLECTION OF CUSTOMS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM.

(Exclusive of Coast Guard, &c.)

For the year

No. of Officers.

Salaries.

1817

7731

£819,686

1822

6788

726,572

1827

5220

630,801

1832

4976

565,021

1835

4809

558,644

Diminution in 18 years

2922

261,042

I think by this statement it is abundantly proved, that we are making considerable advances towards a more economical collection of revenue; and on the part of the Government I do not hesitate in giving a promise that—where it can be done with perfect safety to the revenue, and without danger to the multifarious interests depending upon the proper performance of the duties attached to the officer of Customs, we shall continue in the course on which we have entered, and that whenever a reduction can be adequately made, then a reduction shall take place. It must, how-

653
ever, be clearly understood that the subject is one surrounded with much difficulty, and that in many cases, a reduction will be, for the present, wholly impracticable. It is more than probable that the considerations I have mentioned, (namely—the protection of the revenue, and a due regard to the interests involved,)—may compel us, in particular instances, to increase existing departmental establishments. I may mention, that from the important port of the Clyde we have received a most urgent remonstrance upon this subject, in which it is stated that the present Customs establishment, there, is utterly inadequate, and that, as an act of justice to the parties engaged in its commerce, as well as for the sake of the revenue, some addition should be made to the strength of the establishment. Now this application, if well founded, we must accede to, because we should not be justified for the sake of a paltry unsubstantial economy, in reducing the establishment so low as to hazard either frauds upon the revenue, or the interests of the fair and honest trader, as opposed, as they must be, to those who infringe upon the laws. I now come to the Excise branches of the revenue, and here I expect the House will call upon me to be more explicit than I have hitherto been, and to state clearly the ground upon which I venture to estimate that there will be found, for the coming year, an increase under this head. Well, Sir, the grounds upon which my supposition is based, are as follow:—Under the great heads of revenue, in my budget of last year, the Committee will recollect I stated what had been the ratio of increase which in each year had taken place during the preceding four years; and, having done so, I compared the last year with the preceding three years, with a view of showing how, in each department, the case exactly stood. I have now the result of a similar computation to lay before the Committee, and it will be perceived by my statement that we have progressed still further in our course of prosperity, and that the improvement upon which I had to congratulate the House last year, continues still to flow in a steady and gradually increasing stream. I will take each head alphabetically as it stands, commencing with that of auctions,—
654

Increase per cent. year ending 5th April, 1835, as compared with average of three preceding years.

Increase per cent. year ending 5th April 1836, as compared with average of three preceding years.

Auctions

12

1

Bricks

11

29

Glass

14

17

Hops

21

45

Number of Licences

4

4

Malt

3

14

Paper, first and second class

7

8

Mill-board

7

8

Stained

17

4

decrease

Hard soap

15

8

Soft soap

1

decrease

12

increase

Spirits

7

13

Vinegar

13

7

so that under all these heads of Excise revenue,—after having had a large increase last year, I am enabled to afford the satisfactory intelligence that there is a corresponding increase in the present. Now, with respect to the duty on malt. I should observe that it is on malt I anticipate a very great portion of my increase. I will now tell the House the data on which this anticipation is based.

Year ending Jan. 1.

Bushels.

Bushels.

1833 the consumption was

37,987,000

Average 39,722,600

1834

40,517,000

1835

40,662,000

1836

45,317,000

Being an increase of

5,595,000

To those who doubt the policy of the course which the Members of the present Government have pursued—first, in reference to the repeal of the beer-tax; and next, in resisting a repeal of the malt-duty,—I would say, that I think the results to which I have just referred will justify them, and that Gentlemen on both sides of the House may consider that they acted wisely, both in supporting my right hon. Friend, the Member for Cambridge, in the repeal of the beer-tax, and his Majesty's Government, in resisting the reduction of the malt-tax; because it must be allowed that it is impossible this greatly-increased consumption can have taken place throughout the land without having given to the agriculturist the full measure of the benefit indicated by it. But I anticipate a still greater consumption in the next year; and my expectation of a still greater increase of

655
revenue from the malt-duty rests upon no vague surmise or calculation of my own, but is founded upon the result of former years. By the malt-laws, as they at present exist, the amount is estimated for six months before the collection is made. I have before me an account of the amount received in the last three months, as well as of the amount receivable for the next three months; and the remaining two quarters being uncertain, I take them from the average of six months' consumption for the preceding three years. The result of these calculations is, that the Amount of receipt to October 10,

1836, as estimated from actual charge, is

£4,370,000

And the amount of the Estimate from October 10, 1836, to April 5,1837, on average receipt for three years, will be

1,480,000

£5,850,000

Which deducting repayments from the malt drawback

200,000

Will show that the probable increased amount of duty next year will be

£5,650,000

I cannot quit this question of the Excise without adverting to an experiment which the House sanctioned me in making last year, and pointing out the beneficial results to which I was justified in hoping it would lead, because it will be material when I come to the close of my argument. I allude to the reduction of the duty on flint

lbs.

The first round, ending Feb. 20, 1835,

amounted to

1,196,720

1836

1,272,992

The increase, 1836

76,272

The second round, 1835

1,219,792

1836

1,394,176

The increase, 1836

174,384

The two rounds for the Quarter ending April 5,1835

2,416,512

1836

2,667,168

Leaving a total increase in 1836 of 10 per cent, upon flint glass.

250,656

lbs. weight; or

And this is the effect which has been produced merely on the introduction of the change; indeed, to show the effect produced by the reduction, notwithstanding the rise which has taken place in red lead and American ashes. I find the statement contained in a report I have received as to the result of the alteration.
glass—a trade in which there was reason to expect that England would enter into competition with surrounding nations, if the duty of 6d. per 1b. which pressed upon it could be lightened. I ventured therefore to propose a reduction of the duty from 6d. to 2d. per lb. In this I had two objects—the one the suppression of smuggling, by which I knew that the actual honest manufacturer was oppressed, and that the revenue was cheated in the article of the drawback—the other was to prevent the exertions of the industrious producer from being oppressed by the amount of the duty. I made the experiment, therefore, but it has hitherto been so short a time in operation, that I have not the means of saying that all my anticipations have been realized, but I have it in my power, however, to show the House, that from the steps which the Government are taking in the reduction of the duty, we have reason to expect that those anticipations will prove to have been well founded. With respect to flint glass, I never anticipated that the effects of the reduction would be instantaneous, because I knew that until increased competition was called into action, and additional capital employed in the production, the benefit of the remission of the duties would remain in the hands of the manufacturer, and that it was only from increased competition the public at large would derive benefit; but they are now getting that benefit, as a comparison of analogous periods in 1835 and 1836 will show:—
"In the Lichfield collection two additional furnaces have been built; a manufactory reopened; another is in course of erection; a third is contemplated. In Manchester there is an increase of fourteen per cent.; in Stourbridge of eleven, notwithstanding the increased price of the materials, the value of red lead and American ashes having considerably more than doubled in the last year. In the York

657
collection the manufacturer has considerably enlarged his works, but has yet more orders than he can execute during the next four months. In London the immense demand for phials, moulded bottles, and other low-priced articles, shows that the illicit manufacturer is beaten out of the market, and causes great difficulty in procuring a sufficient number of hands to perform the work. There are comparatively few arrests for illicit manufacture."
Thus the Legislature has produced increased enjoyment and comfort for the people with a diminution of litigation, and a reduction in the frequency of prosecutions, imprisonments, and penalties. This result ought surely to be an encouragement to the House and to the Government to persevere in the course they have taken. There is also another article to which it is important to refer, and which was relieved last year to a considerable extent—I allude to Irish spirits. My noble Friend who preceded me as Chancellor of the Exchequer, finding a decrease in the amount of Irish spirits annually brought to charge, although the consumption was well known to have increased, felt himself compelled to reduce the duty. The result has been as follows: the amount brought to charge for the year ending

Gallons.

January 1, 1833

was

8,542,000

1834

8,382,000

1835

10,329,000

Average

9,084,000

The amount in 1836 was

11,634,000

Being an increase of

2,549,000

gallons.

after the diminution of the duty in or nearly one-third of the whole consumption at the time the duty was the highest. I may here be permitted to state, that a great simplification has taken place in the regulations for the collection of Excise revenue. These changes are still in progress. Already the dealers in tea, wine, and sugar have been much relieved: 187 offices, held at salaries amounting to 11,827 l., have been abolished—in consequence of which change, upwards of 150,000 traders are relieved from the turmoil and inconvenience of an Excise survey, and are left to the free exercise of their trade. I may pass over lightly the smaller branches of the revenue, with which it is scarcely necessary to occupy the time of the House at any length. The amount of the Excise revenue for the next year is calculated at 14,170,000 l. That estimate has been
658
communicated to me by the practical officers of the department—the same who framed the estimate of last year, which has been fully verified by the results. The present estimate is founded upon the same data, and the House may, therefore, rely upon its accuracy. In discussing this part of the question, it is not my intention to allude to the alterations I mean to propose, because I feel that in doing so, I should only embarrass my argument. In almost all the heads of revenue included in the Stamp Acts, with the exception of probates and letters of administration, an increase has taken place last year. I do not anticipate any loss of revenue from the intended Stamp Act now, with the exception of the proposed reduction of the stamps on newspapers. I believe the immediate loss will be compensated by the prospective gain. With respect to newspapers, without anticipating here what I mean to propose, I may observe that I do not believe the reduction will cause any eventual reduction of the revenue—the estimate of the stamp revenue is pretty much the same as were the receipts of last year—it may be taken at 7,000,000 l. The relief given by taxes repealed exceeded, last year, the estimate made by Lord Spencer, and occasioned a loss of 42,000 l. to the revenue. The taxes upon servants, carriages, horses, and other duties, which may be considered as voluntarily-paid by the rich, have produced an excess of 64,000 l., which more than counterbalanced that loss. I now come to the Post Office department; in dealing with which I regret that I have not as yet laid on the Table a Convention which has been concluded by his Majesty with the King of the French. That treaty will produce some loss of revenue; but when we consider the relief which will be given by it to the mercantile community, I believe no real loss will ultimately ensue; but that, on the contrary, a larger amount of revenue will hereafter be received. A Bill was passed last Session upon which that convention is founded. The Act authorized his Majesty to allow the free transportation of foreign newspapers from any country which received our newspapers on the same terms. It also allowed a reduction of postage to be made on certain conditions. The Government has acted in the spirit of that Act, and a Convention has been concluded with France, which will require the sanction of Parliament. Free transmission of news-

659
papers to foreign countries will be secured. The reduction of postage would be from 2s. 5d. from London to Paris, and from 2s. 1d. from Paris to London, to 1s. 8d. It will no longer be necessary, when these reductions are made, that the postage should be paid before the despatch of the letters; and were the high postage continued, the number of instances in which the letters might be refused, would be so great as to occasion the probable loss of a considerable portion of the revenue. I need only state further on this point, that the Post-Office has already been enabled to effect considerable savings, founded upon the recommendation of the Commissioners of Inquiry. In the mail-coach contracts a saving of 12,000 l. a year has been already made. There are other recommendations given in the Report, which must be carefully considered by the Government; and they shall be carried into effect, if it be practicable to do so with safety. I estimate the Post-Office revenue at 1,543,000 l., independent of the reduction of foreign postage, which will bring the amount somewhat below that sum. Having now gone through the various heads of the public revenue, I shall shortly advert to some circumstances which indicate the improved state of the country, and which appear to me to deserve the consideration of the House. I need say nothing with respect to the existing prosperity of the manufacturing districts, because that is a matter which may be taken as admitted. The great activity in the manufacturing districts, and the demand for labour, for machinery, for new works, and increased hands, even in those places where distress has recently been represented to be most prevalent, are all notorious and undeniable. The increased employment even for the hand-loom weavers in various parts of the country, are well known to the public and to the House, and it would, therefore, be unpardonable in me to dilate upon them more particularly. But I may still venture to refer to a few facts which bear materially upon the subject. No facts can be a fairer indication of the state of the country, and of the commercial classes, than the increased or decreased numbers of persons discharged under the Insolvent Debtors' Court. I adverted to this circumstance last year, and had the satisfaction of then stating, that a great reduction bad taken place in
660
the number discharged, but the reduction which I have to announce this year is still greater, as in 1832, the number discharged was 4648; in 1833, 4583; in 1834, 4275; and in 1835, the number was 3890, being a diminution of 658; and I learn from the Report of one of the Judges of the Insolvent Court, dated April 4, 1836:—
"In the clothing districts of Gloucester and Somerset there was a very great improvement; there was no one case of the insolvency of a master or weaver on his own account, where three years ago there had been several. Such a general prosperity was observable in the manufacturing parts of northern and midland counties, that the Judge had frequently expressed in Court his congratulations to the country. This was more especially noticeable at Nottingham and Leicester, where, on former occasions, the numbers of failures had been considerable, and the characters of some of them fraudulent."
The Returns from Ireland presented the same results; but one of the most material and important facts for the House and the country to consider, is the improvement which has taken place in the agricultural parts of the country by the alteration of the poor-laws. I could scarcely have believed it possible that any legislative measure, however sound its principles, could come into such immediate and beneficial action. I admit that it has been aided by adventitious circumstances, by the general demand for labour, and by the low price of food during a great part of the time. I state these circumstances the more freely, because I know that my case is strong enough, after making all allowances. I do not attribute the favourable result of the altered law to those adventitious circumstances, because I might show that, at other periods neither a low price of provisions, nor an increased demand for labour, has produced the same reductions. I am therefore justified in attributing the results, not to two causes, which were common to both periods, but to one cause—the reform of the poor-laws, the effect of which is confined to the present time. This will be clearly demonstrated by the facts to which I am now about to refer.

OPERATION OF NEW POOR-LAWS.
December Quarter.—Number of unions formed 311, including 6676 parishes. Amount of rates brought under guardians 3,368,879 l. The greater part of fifteen counties.
In 122 unions, rates on average of three years amounting to 1,258,867 l.

Expenditure of quarter ending December 30, under old system

£311,717

Expenditure under new system

154,888

Expenditure of year—old system

1,258,867

Estimated expenditure—new system

619,553

Reduction of 49 per cent.

To give more particular instances. I may be allowed to state that the reduction in Uckfield, Battle, and Midhurst Unions, have been more than two-thirds. In the Uckfield Union, containing a population of 16,000 persons, a few days back no more than four able-bodied labourers were out of work in the worst district. The execution of railroads does not effect so much in creating a demand for labour as might be anticipated. The London and Birmingham Company employ but 9,000 men. Value of the labour increased, under the new system, 5s. per week.

March Quarter.—Former statement and results confirmed The reduction in the worst districts fifty-nine per cent., in the best twenty per cent.

Cookburn.

Welwyn.

Stoke Pogis.

Hitchin.

1855–4

852

—

—

—

1854–5

700

783

853

1716

1835–6

580

498

490

1361

In these Returns is to be found the best practical evidence, that the condition of the agricultural classes is not depressed; they afford proofs, on the contrary, that the demand for agricultural labour is augmented—that the system of working by piece-work is more general—and the reward for the industrious labourer increased—and that the falling-off must have arisen from the misapplication of labour, and the misdirection of funds for the relief of the poor to the encouragement of vagrancy, idleness, and imposture. Another indication of prosperity to which I adverted on a former occasion, and to which I beg again to call the attention of the House, is the amount of deposits in the savings' banks. It is sufficient for me now to say, that great as the increase was on the former occasion, the increase exhibited by the present Returns is still greater. The increase of depositors since 1834 has been 35,528, and of deposits 990,791 l. And those deposits are now confined to a certain and limited amount; for an Act, wisely introduced by a right hon. Gentleman opposite restricted all sums deposited to a maximum of 200 l., One reference more illustrative of the present state of the country—and I close this branch of the subject. The fact to which I allude is one which affords me, and will afford the country, the greatest satisfaction. There is, before me, a Return
662
from the Home Office, of the state of crime;—comparing the results of periods of four years, and ascertaining the number of executions which have taken place in England and Wales from 1820 to 1835. In the first four years the number was 362; in the second, 229; in the third, 230; and in the last four years, only 155; being a reduction of more than one-half. In London and Middlesex, in the years 1827, 1828, and 1829, there were sixty-three persons executed; in 1830, 1831, and 1832, there were sixteen; in 1833 there were but two; in 1834 not one; and in 1835 not one. Certain hon. and sceptical Gentlemen, may, however, exclaim, "All this may be true, but has it not a tendency to increase crime? Look at your commitments!—judge not by the number of executions; your Judges may have been over-lenient. The Crown may have pardoned incautiously—Juries may have been indisposed to convict." No such thing, the Return of commitments proves the very reverse:—in 1834 the total number of persons charged with offences was 22,445; in the present year it was 20,731. In the first of those years, taking into account the increase of population, the proportion was one in 647; in the second, it was one in 710, being a decrease of nine per cent., in the state of crime, comparing those two years. In proportion as capital punishment has diminished, crimes connected with violence have diminished; and in the same proportion as crimes connected with violence have diminished; in the same proportion has crime, generally, diminished also. These results are most assuredly calculated to encourage the House in well doing, and are sufficient to encourage them in persevering in the milder system of legislation they have of late years adopted. Before I recall the attention of the House to the question of the surplus revenue, and the best mode in which it may be dealt with, let me be allowed to mention two facts which are not wholly unimportant. Looking at the burthens of the country, I have a right to consider that many of the burthens which press the most heavily upon the community, cannot be justly considered as permanent, though they are the penalties of the war, and the results of the great military and naval establishments consequent upon it. Amongst these are the half-pay allowances and pensions, and these are now more or less in course of

663
reduction, though they have been among the heaviest of our burthens;—the National Debt itself—by the large conversions which of late have been made of one part of it, as hon. Members well know, into life annuities, and of another part into annuities terminable after a certain specified number of years—the debt itself has been materially lightened. Now the House may

REDUCTION OF DEAD WEIGHT.

Half-pay, Chelsea, Greenwich, Army, Navy, Ordnance, and Civil Pensions, and Superannuation Allowances.

Diminution.

Chelsea.—Maximum of numbers

1828

£96,844

Number, 31st March

1836

84,960

£11,884

Grants

1828

£l,568,852

Ditto

1835–6

1,387,169

£181,683

Greenwich Out-pensions.—Maximum

1817

£32,278

Number, 1st January

1836

19,489

£12,789

Amount of Pensions

1817

£354,648

1835

252,563

£102,085

Army Pay-Office Allowances.—Maximum.

1827

£l9,543

1835

16,288

£3,255

Army, Navy, and Ordnance Half-pay, and Pensions.—

Maximum

1827

£3,394,896

1835

2,913,763

£481,133

Naval Half-pay and Pensions.—Maximum

1823

£1,675,358

1835

1,557,976

£117,382

Half-pay, Pensions, and Allowances, Naval, Army, and Civil.—Maximum

1827

£5,455,991

1835

4,976,729

£479,262

I have stated that but for the debt which the House had, as a matter of justice, and a matter of policy, too, contracted with the West-India planters, I should at present be enabled to deal with a surplus, not of 622,000 l., but of 2,000,000 l. and upwards. Limited, as I am, to the smaller sum, I shall now proceed to state how I propose to deal with this available surplus. I cannot repeal all that is asked—I can neither repeal 6,000,000 l. nor 3,000,000 l. of taxes, out of a sum of 600,000 l.; but I shall endeavour to propose such measures of reduction as may with justice be made, and those reductions shall be made on principles of commercial policy which may enable the House hereafter to go further. If I can at once grant relief, and produce an equal revenue in future years, such an
be interested to know the reduction of dead-weight in regard to half-pay, Chelsea and Greenwich Hospitals, the army, navy, ordnance, and civil pensions, and superannuation allowances; and with this view I have caused a Return to be drawn up, which I shall take the liberty of reading to the House. It is as follows:—
operation will afford the means of following up the principle further, and will allow us, very possibly, to give additional relief in following years. It amounts, in fact, to a pledge that a Parliament which acted successfully upon such a principle, was disposed to afford every practicable relief to the suffering interests of the country. I have endeavoured to make a selection upon this principle, and I believe I have made such a selection as, although it may impose upon the public some loss of revenue for the present year, will lead to an increase of our resources at a future time. Upon what principle ought the House to proceed in the remission of taxes? I am bound to look to such descriptions of taxes as have been most raised as war taxes, and which press most severely upon the country in

665
time of peace. If I find two branches of industry, one of which has already obtained relief, while the other is still labouring under a high rate of taxation, I am bound to prefer the removal or reduction of that tax which presses with the greatest weight. If I find a tax which is exposed to evasion and to fraud, and gives rise to smuggling and enables the smuggler to defeat the fair dealer, I am bound to conclude that such a tax is one with which the House ought to deal. If, again, I find a tax so uncertain in its administration, that it leaves the manufacturer doubtful what he ought to pay, and the officer what he ought to exact;—again, I say, that that incident is evidence that the tax is one in which an alteration of system is necessary. Applying these principles, I call the attention of the Committee to a tax which, from the best consideration I can give to the subject, and the best information I have been able to procure in reference to it, unites all these conditions, and is less liable to all these objections. It is to a tax, therefore, of this description that I shall first apply myself. The Committee is aware of the recommendation of the Commissioners of Excise Inquiry for a consolidation of the laws, and a reduction of the Paper Duties. I propose, agreeably to their recommendation, that the duty on paper of the first class should be reduced to one-half its present amount. My noble Friend, the Member for South Lancashire, who presented a petition on this subject, some time since, would, I am sure, if he were present, agree with me in declaring, that there is no other branch of industry, particularly in that part of the country with which he is connected, that has suffered more deeply from the present amount of taxation, and. that there is none that will rise with more elasticity, if adequate relief be given. The tax is now levied in a manner at once uncertain and unequal. The classification which now exists cannot be justified under existing circumstances. It has, in some cases, the effect of fixing a high rate of duty on inferior, and a low rate of duty on superior paper; founded on former times on the relative cost of the materials of each at the time the classification was first established, but this relative price of materials has since become totally reversed, and the law is rendered so uncertain as well as absurd, that no two excisemen can administer it upon the same principles. One manufacturer may find himself obliged to pay 3d. a-pound for paper of the same quality
666
for which his neighbour and competitor at another mill has paid only 1½d. An alteration of this law is essential, not only to the interests of a great and improving branch of the manufactures, but it is also important incidentally to the general interests of literature, upon which the tax presses most severely. The duty forms no inconsiderable part of the price even of a single octavo volume; and this is augmented, because, as the publisher of a book obtains no drawback for unsold copies, the copies which are sold must defray the amount charged on the whole impression. The Committee will, therefore, see that this must be felt as a practical discouragement to the diffusion of knowledge—that the tax is most unjust and unequal is also proved by the fact, that on printing paper the duty is but from fifty to sixty per cent, while on coarser paper it varies from seventy to 200 per cent—that upon the finest writing paper it is twenty-five per cent, and upon the coarsest paper, as I said, it rises to 200 per cent. But it may be said, will not this be the case after the alteration? True; but we have to choose between two evils—a fixed, which must be obviously an unequal duty, and an attempt at a new discriminating duty, subject, as it would be, to all the inconvenience, fraud, and irregularity of the present system. I shall, therefore, adhere to my proposition, of reducing half the present duties. Various persons examined before the Excise Commissioners have calculated the amount of loss the revenue will sustain by the reduction. The income arising from first class paper is 617,000 l. Mr. Gausson estimated the probable loss of revenue at 150,000 l., and another estimate was 62,000 l. I do not take either; I think they are both below the mark. I estimate the loss considerably higher; and, coupling the removal of half the duty on paper with the repeal of the whole duty on stained paper, I estimate it at 250,000 l.; but for the present year it will not exceed 125,000 l., because I do not propose that it should come into operation till October. The Excise Report shows the injustice of a double tax upon the article of stained paper, imposed first upon its original manufacture as paper, and afterwards in its subsequent stage when stained. This I propose to repeal. I believe not only a home consumption, but a very considerable export trade will be the result. I propose that this reduction should begin from October, 1836, in order to give time for the previous consumption of the

667
stock on hand. There will be no suspension of the manufacture in the interval, because the law relating to paper acts upon the bonding system—charging the duty only on the goods which are brought to market, not upon those in the manufactory. I have stated that there will be a loss arising from the treaty of the Post Office with France, by the reduction of postage on letters; this will, altogether, amount to about 20,000 l., of which the commercial correspondence of this country will get the full benefit. If we had not made this concession, France would have had a right to revert to her transit duties, as she paid a greater amount of transit duties than she received from us; but I think it will turn out that we shall sustain no loss of revenue, because we have now steam-boats on the coast, and other unauthorised conveyances carrying on a smuggling traffic, which will be terminated by the Convention. By the Stamp Bill, which is on the Table of the House, an alteration is made in an article of great importance—namely, the probate duty. That alteration enables a party to pay the probate duty, not upon the gross amount of the property of the deceased, which frequently calls upon individuals to make advances upon insolvent estates, and leaves them afterwards to the expense of litigation to recover their advances, but on the net amount, clear of all claim against the property. It is an alteration which will have the effect of with-drawing from the Exchequer a credit to the amount of 100,000 l. which it has at present, of which, within the present year, it would lose about 20,000 l. But it is an amount we ought never to have gained. We were not entitled to possess this money; it belonged properly to the executors. A small reduction will be proposed in the South Sea duties of great importance to the merchants engaged in the trade, which I will take at 10,000 l. a-year, although it will probably fall short of that amount. I now come to another branch of the revenue in which I propose a reduction, and I fear that the moment I mention it I shall be met with a double fire—one from my hon. Friends behind me, and the other from the hon. Gentlemen opposite—I allude to the subject of newspaper stamps. I ask Gentlemen to do me the honour of hearing me for a short time while I explain the alterations which it is my intention to propose. I have neither the right nor the presumption to think that I can offer myself as an arbiter between those Gentlemen to recon-
668
cile their different sentiments, but I will take the liberty of representing to both of them the position in which the question stands at the present moment. I say to those who ask for the total repeal of that duty, "Do you think that any Minister could come down to this House, on such a financial statement as I have just made, and propose that 400,000 l., out of the surplus of 662,000 l., should be devoted absolutely to the repeal of the stamp-duties on newspapers? Do you think that even if a Minister were so disposed, he could induce the House to accompany him in such a scheme?" I know full well that the House would not accompany me; and even if the House were disposed to do so, I am not disposed to make the proposition, because I have always considered this a fit subject for taxation; and so long as the newspaper proprietors ask the Government to transmit their papers free of postage through the land, it is just, and legitimate, and right, that they should be made a subject of taxation. I am, therefore, not disposed to make a proposal for their total repeal; but I will go further, and say, that in the present state of public opinion, if I were to make such a proposition it would be rejected. Does any hon. Gentleman doubt it? if so let him bring forward his motion, and put it to the vote. Let the House see who those are, who, in the present state of the finances of the country, wish to apply 400,000 l. out of 600,000 l. to the repeal of stamps on newspapers. But I say, that it is material to deal with this branch of the subject, and that I adhere to the opinions which I expressed last year, on the motion of the hon. Member for Lincoln, that the present stamp-duty on newspapers is one which can neither be continued or defended. The proposition then made—the principle of which I acquiesced in, and promised should be carried into effect on a fitting occasion—gives me a right to ask of the House, if not to support, at least to consider, my proposition.! Are hon. Members, who object to the reduction of the duty to one penny, aware of the state of things going on in society? Do they know the position in which the present rate of duty places those who would maintain the administration of the law, and the security of property? Have they considered the manner in which it affects not the Government, but the just estimation in which the Magistrates ought to be held, and the safety of the revenue itself? Upon these grounds, and for the sake of the

669
good order of society, I call upon the House to repeal a portion of the duty on newspapers;—the repeal, not for the abandonment, but for the preservation, of the revenue. The illicit trade in unstamped papers has been going on for a considerable time. It began in London, where they were circulated in open defiance of the law, and rapidly extended itself through the country. Under these circumstances active measures were resorted to in order to check it. Persons have been prosecuted, convicted, fined, and imprisoned; Exchequer suits have been instituted; indeed the whole powers of the law have been exhausted, but the sale still continues. Gentlemen will do me the favour of believing that this enforcement of the law has been one of the most painful parts of my duty—it is one which has exposed me to abundance of obloquy and reproach both in and out of this House, but more particularly out-of-doors. I have been in communication with the parties interested in the reduction of the stamp-duties—I have seen the newspaper proprietors; and they admit that it is impossible to meet the case as it now stands. And why? The reason is obvious—the temptation to violate the law is too great to be resisted. It has been tried in other duties. In Ireland, in order to put an end to illicit distillation, laws have been enacted which it has been justly remarked are more fit for the meridian of Turkey than that of Great Britain—they even punish the innocent for the guilty, and resort to almost every kind of violence, yet without effect; for it is always impossible, by any legal enactment, to maintain an unreasonably high rate of duty on any article. The only plan is, to fix the duty below the insurance on smuggling—and this is what I propose to do, and what I trust the House will go along with me in doing. What do hon. Gentlemen apprehend from the repeal? Is it loss of revenue? I tell them that it is going, and that it will go, if we do not adopt the principle of reduction. This is proved by the returns now before me of the duty on newspapers. In 1831 the gross revenue was 586,000 l.; the net revenue, 483,000 l.; in 1832, 574,000 l.; net. 473,000 l.; in 1833, 541,000/.; net, 446,000 l.; in 1834 the gross revenue was 537,000 l.;—a continued diminution during the four years. The real question is, will hon. Members countenance a system of violation of the
670
law, which, however bad in itself, is still more mischievous in the way of example. In Ireland, already, agencies have been established for the sale of the unstamped publications; and our experience in England has taught us, that to stop them without reducing the duty is impossible. I believe that some hon. Members in this House are such advocates for the total repeal of these duties, that they would rather I should leave the matter as it now stands than effect a reduction to one penny. They see that it would put an an end to the illicit trade, and that they would lose all chance of a repeal. If hon. Members support me in the reduction I contemplate, in three years I have no doubt the result will be, that we shall have a larger revenue arising from this source than we have now. I do not wish to advert to matters personal to myself, for I am resolved to abide the hazard of what I have proposed, though it produce discontent on this side of the House and resistance on the other, because I believe it to be just and reasonable, and the House will deal with it as it pleases. I shall persevere in it, in order to save the revenue—to defeat the existing combination against the law—to put an end to vexatious prosecutions against the public—to shelter the law and the Government from odium and contempt—and to defend the fair trader from the encroachments of the smuggler. If these are not grounds for repealing a tax, I know not what grounds can be considered sufficient; and, therefore, I propose that the duty on newspapers be reduced from 4d. (minus the discount) to 1d. I have consulted the parties whose property is invested in the trade, and it being their opinion that the reduction should take place as speedily as possible, the time fixed upon is the 5th of July. I calculate, therefore, for the loss of revenue for three-quarters of a year; and as I estimate the loss for a whole year at 200,000 l., the loss for this year will be only 150,000 l. I have no doubt whatever that there will be an enormous increase in the revenue upon the paper duty as well as by the advertisement duty—by the increased number of newspapers, as well as from the increased advertisements, and that increase, as in other cases, will become the foundation of future reduction. I think it right to add, that I am afraid I must resist the applications which have

671
been made for a reduction of the duty on Irish newspapers to one halfpenny. They now paid 2d. (minus the discount), and are transmitted free of cost through all the post-offices in the empire; and having the same privileges as the English newspaper they are entitled only to the same relief. I do, however, contemplate a small relief to them, and as I should be sorry to be mistaken on this point, I beg to state to the House my grounds for so doing. If they paid 2d. duty it might be reduced to 1d. at once, to put them on the same footing as the English papers, and they might reduce the price of their paper 1d. to the purchasers; but the fact is, that owing to the discount allowed to them they pay less than 1d., and if they reduce the price of the paper, the 1d. which is nominally, but not really taken off, they would give the public more than they gain. Besides this, they are threatened with British competition, which to a certain extent may injure them. To counterbalance this, I propose to afford them a small reduction in the duty on advertisements; in doing which I have also another object. I try it partly as an experiment, which, if it answer my expectations, I may hereafter reduce to practice in England also, but I cannot venture to try it upon a larger scale at once. On a former occasion I proposed the reduction of duty on insurances on farming buildings; Lord Spencer's repeal applied to insurances on farming stock only, but I now propose to extend it to farming buildings. The relief on farming stock amounted to about 30,000 l. a year; on the buildings it will amount to about 8,000 l.; in the present year the amount of both will be about 15,000 l. There are certain other small taxes, by the repeal of which relief to the extent of about 5,000 l. will be given, making a total repeal of about 351,000 l. in this year, or 563,000 l. when they come into operation. I hope that, in proportion as those reductions come into operation, the increased consumption will greatly redeem them in the additional amount of duty. I have been in hopes of being able to make some reduction on the duty on maritime insurances, and I still believe that some alteration may be made without any considerable loss to the revenue. The hon. Member for Worcester, of course, is at liberty, in the mean time, to bring his own substantive case on the subject before the House;
672
but I would remind the House, that the whole surplus is only 662,000 l., and that, after the reductions I propose, will leave a surplus of 300,000 l.; and therefore I do not feel that I am justified in making a proposition for any greater reduction. These are the grounds on which I ask the House to receive this statement—I do not say to assent to it—they are not called upon to give any absolute vote to-night. All I ask with respect to newspaper stamps is, that hon. Gentlemen opposite who are opposed to the reduction, will consider calmly and attentively, what is the effect of the law in its present state; and I ask hon. Gentlemen on this side, who would wish to go further, whether it is practicable to do so? I think, if they reflect on the subject, and unite in supporting my proposition, it will be the means of effecting great good for the country. I regret the extraordinary length of time I have occupied in making my statement, and the necessary dullness of the relation. I am aware that I have referred to points on which I have touched on a former occasion, but I prefer enabling the House strictly and accurately to compare the income and expenditure of the present with those of preceding years, to seeking novelty or excitement. I cannot sit. down without again stating, that, whilst we have the greatest reason to be grateful for our present state of prosperity, at the same time there are indications at the present moment which call for every hon. Gentleman's close inspection. The House must see, in the great extent of speculation which prevails,—in the number of banks which are rising up in all directions,—grounds for the exercise of vigilance, caution, and prudence. I apprehend that there is nothing in these circumstances calculated to give rise to apprehension. But though there is nothing to excite alarm, there is enough to call for and justify prudence and vigilance. An hon. Friend near me reminds me that the hon. Member for Exeter would never have forgiven me if I had forgotten to state that I am prepared to repeal entirely the additional fifty per cent. on spirit licences. I, however, look for an equivalent to the loss of revenue thus sustained from the operation of a plan, the details of which are not yet quite matured, and which, consequently, I am not now prepared to state to the House. I can, however, inform my hon. Friend and the other hon. Members who are inter-

673
rested on behalf of their constituents in the question, that the main principle will be, to make the additional duty proportional to the quantity of spirits consumed. I am convinced by the arguments which were used on a former occasion, that the duty in question presses unjustly and unequally on particular parties. I trust that those hon. Gentlemen who have been loudest in their advocacy in the repeal of the additional duty on spirit licences, will feel bound in good faith, if they consider my scheme for making the amount of duty proportional to the consumption a good one, to give their best help to carry it into effect. I cannot sit down without thanking the Committee for the indulgence which they have extended to me, for I am aware that I have trespassed largely upon their patience. As a matter of form, I will conclude by proposing a vote for a certain sum. Estimates to the amount of 11,811,000 l. have been voted, and I will now propose a vote of 8,000,000 l., which, of course, will not cover the amount of supply granted; if, however, any hon. Member object to the vote being taken, on the ground that no notice has been given, I will postpone it, and content myself with moving, that the Chairman do now report progress. However, I suppose no objection will be made to the course I propose to pursue, and therefore I conclude by moving, that a sum of 8,000,000 l. be granted for the service of his Majesty.
Mr. Humethought, that the details into which the right hon. Gentleman had entered must be most gratifying to the House. No part of the statement had been more satisfactory to him (Mr. Hume) than that in which the right hon. Gentleman had pointed out the advantages which had arisen in consequence of the repeal of the duty upon beer. The right hon. Gentleman had stated, that the surplus revenue for the present year would amount to something more than 600,000 l. But if there had not been what he (Mr. Hume) must still call a very unnecessary increase in the naval force of 5,000 seamen, there would have been a surplus of at least 1,000,000 l., of which 400,000 l. might have been applied to the general reduction of taxation. No reason whatever had yet been assigned for the increase of the naval force; and no one, he apprehended, would contend that a reduction of 400,000 l. in the amount of taxation would not be hailed by the country as a great boon. It was not his intention
674
at that moment to enter into the question of the tax upon newspapers, seeing that a much better opportunity would be afforded hereafter; but he could not abstain from stating, that he thought there were few other taxes which could be repealed with such great advantage. The right hon. Gentleman had stated many reasons in favour of that subject, but there were several other strong reasons which the right hon. Gentleman had not noticed. The right hon. Gentleman had alluded very properly to the unpopularity and difficulty which his predecessor, Lord Spencer, had to encounter in carrying the law into effect with respect to stamped publications, and it was also true that the steps taken to enforce the law had not been effectual. For two or three years past the prisons had been filled with victims to the tax upon newspapers. Upwards of 150 individuals had been imprisoned for selling unstamped papers; yet, notwithstanding the severity of the law, it was found that the sale of unstamped papers, instead of being diminished, was every day increasing. It was highly necessary, therefore, that a change should be made in the law upon this subject, with as little delay as possible. He must say, however, that he thought the right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not made a very fair statement as to the result which would follow the repeal of the duty on newspapers. Would the House, asked the right hon. Gentleman, submit to the reduction of 400,000 l on newspapers only, out of a surplus of revenue amounting to only 600,000 l. That was not a fair statement, because the reduction of the duty would not, in fact, be 400,000 l. The increase in the sale of newspapers arising from the repeal of the tax, would lead to a corresponding increase in the productiveness of the duty upon paper, and this, added to the optional penny-post tax which it was proposed to continue upon newspapers transmitted through the post-office, would, in his opinion, be nearly sufficient to supply the deficiency occasioned by the repeal of the stamp duty. But he would leave the further discussion of this topic until the proposition was brought forward (which it most assuredly would be) for the total repeal of the stamp-duty on newspapers. Quitting that subject, then, he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he did not think that the whole of the duty upon glass ought to be repealed? He wished the right hon. Gentleman to be honest upon that point. He wished the right hon. Gentleman would state what

675
was the cost of collecting the small amount of duty on that article which was still continued. He wished the right hon. Gentleman would state whether the whole amount of the revenue derived from that particular source much exceeded the cost of collecting it. If it did exceed the cost of collection at all, he was quite satisfied that the excess was not so great as to warrant a continuation of the tax With regard to the stamp duties generally, he hoped, when the proper time came, the right hon. Gentleman would he prepared to state that he contemplated a material reduction; because, as he (Mr. Hume) had been informed, a considerable amount would be gained to the revenue by a reduction. If there were a stamp duty that required reduction more than any other, it was undoubtedly the stamp on marine insurances. That tax was not only bad in itself, but it was the cause of driving the profit and advantage of marine insurance from the shores of England, and of transferring it to the maritime countries of the Continent. It had besides an injurious effect upon the general commerce of the country. The impolicy and injustice of this tax had, however, been so well pointed out by the hon. Member for Worcester, that he (Mr. Hume) should not think it necessary to say more upon the subject on that occasion. The right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, seemed to look with dreadful apprehension at the spirit of speculation which now pervaded the country. He (Mr. Hume) confessed that he had no fears upon that score. As long as the Bank of England continued to be conducted on the principles upon which it was now governed there need be no apprehension of a crisis or of a panic. Had that establishment been conducted on the same principle in 1825, there would have been no crisis, perhaps no panic, at that time. He was quite satisfied that the banking system throughout the country was in a sound and healthy state, and as long as banks were compelled to pay their notes in gold, on demand, there could be no just ground for apprehension or alarm. At the same time, he should be sorry to see the people, generally running into such wild schemes, as, unfortunately, there were sometimes instances of. If, at the present moment, any such schemes existed, he believed that in the course of a very few months there would be an end to them. He wished that the right hon. Gentleman had taken the trouble to bring before the House the great
676
increase which had taken place in the import of almost every article on which there had been a decrease of duty. The increase on some of these articles was perfectly enormous. This he thought should hold out an encouragement to the House to reduce all those taxes which had been imposed during the war, and the continuance of which operated in a direct and powerful manner to check and impede the commerce and manufactures of the country.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerbegged to say one or two words in reply to some of the observations which had fallen from the hon. Member for Middlesex. That hon. Gentleman had asked why he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not repeal the whole of the duty on glass? In reply to that question he could only state, that the general principle upon which he had acted was to reduce the duty to such a rate as not injuriously to press upon any particular manufacture, but at the same time to continue so much of it as, by an increased consumption of the article manufactured, should make up for the deficiency which would otherwise be occasioned in the revenue. There was one other topic to which he wished to refer. The hon. Gentleman seemed to think that the observations which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had made with respect to the spirit of speculation which at present existed, implied an apprehension on his part of some impending calamity. That was not the case. But if in referring to the general prosperity which now seemed to pervade the country, he had not at the same time stated that which he believed to be true, that there were circumstances connected with the spirit of speculation now generally abroad which ought not to create apprehension or alarm, but to excite the attention and vigilance of Parliament—if he had not done this, he thought he might very fairly be accused of having neglected an important part of the duty which attached to one filling his important and responsible situation.
Mr. Goulburnintended to conform to what appeared to be the general feeling of the House, and to what he considered the best practical mode of dealing with the subject before them, and to abstain from entering into any detail on the various points which the right hon. Gentleman had suggested with respect to the repeal of duties, until each individual subject was brought in a proper shape before them. He knew from experience, that the attention of that House would never be given to

677
any question which was not brought before it in a palpable and tangible shape; and, therefore, if upon that ground alone, he should forbear from entering into the various questions to which the right hon. Gentleman had referred. There was, however, one part of the right hon. Gentleman's speech upon which he thought he might be excused for making one or two observations, because a subsequent opportunity of doing so would not be afforded him. With the views which he entertained upon the Report, he thought it particularly desirable that whenever they had before them the financial statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and when they were called upon to consider how they should deal with the surplus, and what amount of surplus should be allowed to remain—when these matters were brought under their consideration, he always thought it advisable to remind the House, that in addition to the duty which was imposed upon them of giving the utmost relief in their power to the suffering of any particular class, or to the pressure upon any particular class arising from taxation, they had yet a duty more urgent, in his view, and one from which they ought never for a moment to shrink—that of considering the necessity of providing, not only for present means and present convenience, but of regarding what was the state of that great debt which pressed upon the country, lightly now, perhaps, in moments of ease and comparative prosperity, but which, in more difficult and tempestuous times, if not properly attended to now, might press upon the nation with a weight scarcely to be supported. If he found any fault with the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, it was that he had passed over all reference to that question in one single sentence, and merely told the House that the National Debt had undergone a reduction by the conversion of it into terminable annuities. He was not opposed to that conversion, but when they looked back, as they ought to do, at this mode of dealing with the debt, they must bear in mind how small a proportion the terminable annuities bore to the mass of the debt with which they had to deal; and they must also take into view, that whilst they considered the reduction of the funded debt, they must not forget the annual increase of the unfunded debt. Having before him the finance accounts for the last five years, he had taken the trouble to draw out a statement of the progress which, during that period, had
678
been made in the reduction of the debt. He found from those papers, that in 1831 the total charge of all the debt, including the interest on the funded debt, what was paid of terminable annuities, and what paid for unfunded debt, amounted in round numbers to 28,350,000 l. In 1836, taking the account which had that day been printed, and placed in their hands, and which, perhaps, did not present an exact analogy, being made up to the quarter ending in January instead of that ending in April, but which he was obliged to resort to, having no other—by that account, he observed, that the total amount of the charge of the debt last year was 28,784,000 l., being an increase in the charge of the debt since the year 1831, of upwards of 400,000 l.; and this increased sum did not include the annual interest on the West-Indian loan. This increase in the charge of the debt, too, it must be observed, had taken place, notwithstanding the advantages which the Government had enjoyed since the year 1831, of relieving the country of an annual burden of 50,000 l., by a reduction of the Four per Cents.; and also by another obtained from the altered bargain with the Bank of England of 100,000 l. With all these advantages they were now about 450,000 l. worse than they were in the year 1831. This was a point to which he thought the attention of the House ought always to be directed. They had been constantly, and were still constantly, in the habit of issuing annually an augmentation of exchequer bills, and thence, in a great degree, arose the increased charge, which he was anxious to point out, in order that steps might he taken for its reduction. He wished the House not to be led away by a notion that the receipts were so much above the expenditure. It might be said, which he admitted, that part of the increase arose from the conversion of interminable into terminable annuities. But there was little consolation to be derived from that. In 1831 the unfunded debt amounted to 25,600,000 l. In the present year it amounted to about 29,000,000 l., being an increase, since the year 1831, of 3,400,000 l. He begged the House to understand, that he did not wish to interfere with the course which the Government adopted in issuing exchequer bills; but what he contended for was this, that as the re-payments came back, the House ought to see that they were applied to the reduction of the debt. Then, with respect

679
to the terminable annuities. In the year 1831 the quantity of terminable annuities amounted to 3,300,000 l. At the present period it appeared that they amounted to 4,070,000 l., being an increase of very nearly 700,000 l. He (Mr. Goulburn) thought, that in that statement of facts, which, as far as the papers upon the table of the House could hear him out, he would undertake to say, was a fair and correct one; there were circumstances which called upon the House to exercise the greatest caution in dealing with any surplus which the Chancellor of the Exchequer might contemplate. He thought the present the proper moment to make a statement of this description, in order that before they came to the discussion of the various repeals of taxation which were to be proposed to them, they might bear in mind how those repeals would operate with regard to the views which he had taken of the subject. He hoped, also, that if some hon. Gentlemen were disposed individually to press for the reduction of particular taxes, they would not forget the increase of the debt, which he had endeavoured to bring under their consideration. With respect to any other part of the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, he had only to join in what appeared to be the general feeling, that there was an existing state of prosperity in the country which called for mutual congratulation, but which he thought, with the right hon. Gentleman, was not such as would warrant any exuberant liberality in dealing with the finances of the country. He thought with the right hon. Gentleman, that they would be dealing much more prudently if for the next year they calculated upon a less prosperous state than that which had sprung up between the last and the present year. Having adverted to these, which were the main points pressing on his mind, he had now only to refer for a moment to a matter which partook somewhat more of a personal character, and which arose out of a conversation which took place between the right hon. Gentleman and himself on a former occasion, when he (Mr. Goulburn) presented a petition to the House on the subject of the proposed reduction of the newspaper stamp. He (Mr. Goulburn) did not then propose to enter into the question of whether the reduction of that duty would be proper or improper—he would not even advert to the point which he was anxious to bring under the consideration of the House when he presented the peti-
680
tion—all that he wished to do was, to reply to an observation then made by the right hon. Gentleman. The right hon. Gentleman was understood to accuse the petitioners with unfairness in coming before the House with such a complaint as that stated in their petition, having had a communication with him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) on the subject of the proposed limitation of the size of newspapers, and he having reason to believe that they were satisfied with the limitation he proposed. Since the statement of the right hon. Gentleman had gone abroad, he (Mr. Goulburn) had received letters upon the subject from several of the petitioners. He had one from the editor and printer of the Times, in which they stated that they neither directly nor indirectly had agreed to any proposition for restricting the size of any newspapers, or authorised or deputed any one to communicate with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the subject. He had also a letter from the editor and printer of The Morning Post, couched in similar terms. Neither directly nor indirectly had they been concerned in the proposed measure for limiting the size of newspapers. He (Mr. Goulburn) thought it but just that the right hon. Gentleman should know the declaration of those gentlemen on the subject of their having been parties to any propositions for altering the size of newspapers; and he therefore took the earliest opportunity of communicating to him the contents of the letters he had received. But before he quitted this subject, he must be permitted to make a few observations on the personalities in which the right hon. Gentleman indulged the other night with respect to himself. The right hon. Gentleman taxed him, with considerable warmth, for having presented a petition on the subject of limiting the size of newspapers, in utter oblivion of his own recorded sentiments upon the subject; and the right hon. Gentleman quoted a paragraph from a Bill which had been in the Stamp-office, and which was left by him (Mr. Goulburn) in the Treasury, in which, undoubtedly, there did stand a clause for reducing the size of newspapers to within certain limits. At the time that the right hon. Gentleman read that paragraph, he (Mr. Goulburn) was so little aware of ever having intended to adopt such a limitation, that the first impulse of his mind was to give a direct and positive contradiction to the statement. But supposing that the right hon. Gentleman had thoroughly in-

681
vestigated the subject, and that his (Mr. Goulburn's) own memory must have totally failed him upon the subject, he allowed it for the moment to pass by. But when he referred to the schedule of duties placed by him on the table of the House in 1830, he found that, so far from a limitation of the size of newspapers, he adopted in that schedule the provisions of the Act of Parliament introduced by Mr. Huskisson, making no limitation whatever, but giving relief to those who published separate papers as supplements, and giving further relief to those whose papers consisted entirely of advertisements. The schedule thus laid on the table contained that record of opinion upon the subject by which he was bound to stand. The Bill from which the right hon. Gentleman had quoted was not, in fact, before the House—it was in draft; and he certainly did not expect—indeed, he did not think it either right or courteous, that a public officer, filling the same situation which he (Mr. Goulburn) had once the honour to hold, should avail himself of such means to lead the House to suppose that his opinions were different at one moment to what they were at another. [The Chancellor of the Exchequer: The Bill was in print.] He knew that. It was printed, but printed how? Not by order of the House; but printed in draft. When it was brought to him in manuscript, it was so long and so painful to read that he begged to have it printed draft-wise, and in that state it was that it must have fallen into the hands of the right hon. Gentleman. The Bill was never brought forward; and he begged to state now, once for all, that there were propositions in it, as it was originally drawn and submitted to him, in which he could not concur. If the right hon. Gentleman meant to make the quotation from the Bill a charge against him, it was really one of a more serious nature than he seemed to think. The right hon. Gentleman charged him with an intention of imposing a duty on newspapers according to their size. If that were really his intention, how fraudulently must he have dealt with the House, having presented to the House a schedule upon the subject, and in that schedule having said nothing whatever about the intended restriction. But he would not dwell longer upon the subject. He thought, however, that the House would agree with him, that whatever argument the right hon. Gentleman had derived from reference to a Bill printed in
682
draft, was worth nothing. At all events, he appealed from the Bill to the schedule which he had laid upon the table of the House. The opinion expressed in the schedule upon the subject he should be prepared, when the proper time arrived, to maintain, and to show that the mode in which the right hon. Gentleman proposed to deviate from what took place in 1830 with respect to newspapers, was not advisable for the press, nor desirable for the country. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by again directing the attention of the House to the necessity of providing for the reduction of the national debt, before it sought for the application of any great amount of surplus to the reduction of taxation.
Mr. Robinsonconcurred generally in the views taken by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and was happy to find that, notwithstanding the reduction of 8,000,000 l. of taxation within the last few years, there would still, but for the amount of interest payable on the money voted for the emancipation of the negroes, have been a clear surplus for the present year, of not less than 1,000,000 l. The right hon. Gentleman had, in the course of his observations on the excellent working of the principle of free trade alluded to the importation of French wines; but it did not appear to him that a greater failure, as a financial measure, than that of the equalisation of the duties on French wines, either in the way of producing an increased consumption, or of inducing a disposition on the part of the French Government to adopt reciprocal measures, had ever taken place. As a commercial man he thanked the right hon. Gentleman for the very salutary remarks he had made as to the necessity of caution on the part of those engaged in trade. He did not take any desponding views of the present state of the country; nor did he anticipate any reaction; at the same time it was the duty of a financial Minister to remind the country that by possibility some check might be given to the present prosperity, which arose in part, he was afraid, from over speculation. The right hon. Gentleman estimated that the stamp duties would produce next year 7,000,000 l. whereas this year they only produced 6,900,000 l.; and yet he proposed a reduction in that duty of upwards of 200,000 l. How could the right hon. Gentleman entertain this expectation, unless he anticipated to make up the difference by his

683
arrangements in the new Stamp Act? There was hardly one clause in that Bill which did not call for the serious consideration of the House before they consented to it. The right hon. Gentleman had said, that whenever a tax became unproductive, it was in itself an evidence of the impolicy of the tax. Now he had stated yesterday, that although the trade and commerce of the country had gone on increasing, yet the produce of the stamp duty on marine insurances had decreased. He therefore hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would take the subject into his consideration, and propose some reduction of that tax. After all, it appeared that the only reduction of taxes proposed were those on newspapers, on glass, and on paper. He certainly would never ask for a reduction of taxes below the amount of available surplus revenue, and as other opportunities would be afforded, he would not now do more than generally express his satisfaction with the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman, and a hope that the resources of the country would go on so improving as to admit of a further reduction of taxation, by which its industry and commerce might be promoted.
Sir Robert Peelintended to follow the example so wisely set by the Gentlemen who had spoken in the course of this slight discussion, because he thought it exceedingly wise to interpose some interval between hearing the financial statement of a Minister of the Crown, from which they ascertained the amount of surplus revenue that could be fairly applied in the reduction of taxation, and of pronouncing any conclusive opinion in debate, as to the taxes which ought to be selected for reduction. Assuming that there were 500,000 l. or 600,000 l., which might be fairly applied in the remission of taxes, he should like to have an opportunity of referring to the very valuable information collected by the Commissioners of Inquiry into the state of the Excise Laws, for the purpose of forming a comparative view of the whole subject of taxation, and of ascertaining by what mode they might avail themselves of the small amount of surplus in the most effectual manner, for the purpose of decreasing the burdens of the people, and of increasing the productive industry of the country. The glass duty, the paper duty, the soap duty, and one other duty which had not been adverted to by the right hon. Gentleman,
684
but which he (Sir Robert Peel) should be glad to have the opportunity of fully considering—namely, the duty levied upon the importation of raw cotton—all these various points he should now avoid pronouncing any opinion upon; but having made up his mind as to the surplus available, he should at a future opportunity give his opinion as to what were the taxes most prudent to reduce. He felt the force of the observation made by his right hon. Friend (Mr. Goulburn), that in time of peace we were not making any rapid progress in the reduction of the funded debt; while we were increasing our unfunded debt, which, in a time of difficulty, might press with peculiar severity upon the country. These were considerations which ought never to escape the attention of that House; and before the House dealt too liberally with respect to a surplus revenue, he hoped that those subjects would engage their serious attention. With regard to the duty on the importation of raw cotton, he would just state, that in the year ending 5th April, 1835, the duty collected upon that article, which undoubtedly was one of the main sources of the prosperity of the country, amounted to 374,000 l.; and in the year ending the 5th April, 1836, the amount levied was 400,000 l.; the rate of duty being, he believed, only five-sixteenths of a penny per 1b. But it behoved the House to bear in mind that the manufacturers of this country were exposed—and so long as peace continued, they would be exposed—to vigorous foreign competition. He, therefore, would say, that to levy such a duty as 400,000 l. upon a raw material which formed the staple of our chief manufactures, was most unwise. On the one hand no advantage could be gained from so small a revenue; on the other, it would be most dearly purchased if by retaining it. we should increase the advantages of an increasing and successful competition by foreign countries. With his views as to the necessity of maintaining public credit inviolate, and as to the impolicy of making no provision whatever for the interruption of that prosperity the country was now enjoying, and deprecating as he did the approach to that state of things by which they might encumber themselves with a new debt, he could not certainly press for the remission of the whole tax upon raw cotton; but he should rejoice to see its amount reduced as low as possible,

685
so as not to encourage unnecessarily any competition in that important branch of trade. He also wished to reserve to himself an opportunity of considering whether, in dealing with so small an amount of surplus revenue, it might not be better to remit the duty altogether on one article, than to make a remission of a portion of the duty on two or more articles; whether, for instance, the total abolition of all excise regulations with respect to glass might not lead to a great extension of the manufacture of that useful article in this country; and whether that might not be a new and an abundant source of wealth, by our becoming manufacturers of an article which was now chiefly manufactured by other countries. There was one point to which he thought his right hon. Friend (Mr. Goulburn) had intended to call the attention of the House—the policy of increasing the exportation of beer. There did seem to be a prospect of a very great increase in that branch of our export trade; and whether it might not be further increased by some regulation with respect to allowing a drawback, was worthy of consideration. He differed from the hon. Member for Middlesex as to the impolicy of the observation made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in that tone of caution and warning which he assumed when speaking of the present state of prosperity in the country. It was infinitely more becoming the station of a finance Minister to adopt the language and tone of caution, than the tone and language of unbounded confidence. At the same time, he saw great cause for congratulation in the present state of the manufacturing industry of the country. He believed that our present prosperity stood in general upon stable foundations, while peace continued with foreign countries; and particularly if there were any hope of the South American provinces being restored to a state of quiet and tranquillity, he could not but think that, with the elastic spirit of industry and enterprise in this country, there was a reasonable prospect of the continuance of a great part of our present prosperity. But, at the same time, he certainly thought there were indications which would lead prudent men to doubt whether the whole of that prosperity was sound, or whether the activity which was now everywhere displayed, was necessarily connected with a safe and permanent state of things. It
686
was impossible to see the rapid and universal rise in the price of every article of consumption, without asking the question—to what was that to be attributed? It was impossible to take up some of the newspapers—he particularly referred to some Liverpool papers—without witnessing a rage for the formation of joint-stock companies, having for their professed objects matters exceeding in absurdity those of the joint-stock companies of the year 1825. He had seen prospectuses put forth in a Liverpool paper of schemes which completely astonished him, proceeding as they did from a place so eminent in the commercial world, so noted for the astuteness of its inhabitants, especially that class who there carried on commercial affairs. Projects have been put forth by commercial men for carrying on manufactures and other commercial speculations by means of joint-stock companies, which could only be carried on with success when directed by individual enterprise, and with a view to individual profit. Coupling these two facts together—an universal rise in prices of all articles of consumption, and this tendency not merely to an ordinary kind of speculation, but to similar mad projects to those which prevailed in the year 1825—without feeling any cause of despondency, or any undue anxiety, yet he thought those were but acting the part of prudent men who, in time, made use of words of caution from prudential motives. There were two circumstances which ought not altogether to escape the notice of the House. One was a measure which, when first introduced, he strongly opposed—which he knew was adopted with the single view, and not perhaps unwisely, of meeting a memorable commercial crisis—namely, the measure which relieved the country banks from paying their notes above 5l. in gold, and permitting them to exchange their paper for the paper of the Bank of England. While he admitted, that supposing a crisis arose, much of the evil of the crisis might be obviated by giving such permission; yet he always feared that the measure itself had a tendency to precipitate that crisis. Therefore, he for one witnessed the adoption of that permission with some anxiety and some alarm. Now, whether the principle upon which the joint-stock banks were established was perfectly sound or not, he was not prepared to say; but it

687
did so happen, that coincident with all sorts of speculation, the multiplication of joint-stock banks throughout the country had taken place. Nothing could be so unjust as any inquisitorial interference with the private transactions of commercial men; but he thought, that as regarded these joint-stock banks, the legislature had a full right to require that there should be some general regulation established as to the principles upon which those banks should be conducted. Whether or not the habit of granting accommodation to the partners of those banks by issues of their own notes, was perfectly consistent with the commercial interests of the country, was a question which might be well deserving of consideration. He was aware at the same time that what might tend to diminish his anxiety was the present state of the foreign exchanges. Whether or not they ought to consider the state of foreign exchanges as a real test of soundness in a time of general commercial confidence and prosperity, whether they acted with sufficient rapidity, and were an infallible guide, was a point upon which he was not prepared to pronounce any decisive opinion. We were now proceeding with a flowing tide and a favourable wind, and every thing appeared prosperity and happiness; but we should bear in mind that in all times, even apart from those factitious causes which might be now increasing our prosperity, the commercial history of this country showed that we were subject to vicissitudes arising from excessive speculation; and when that period should ar-rive—if ever it did arrive—he was sure we should not feel regret that in a time of general exultation and general quiet, there were some found amongst us who, not desponding, not in the least despairing—nay, believing that a great portion of our prosperity did rest upon stable and solid foundations—yet did, from prudential considerations, warn the House and the country that that prosperity might not be permanent, and that, interspersed with solid causes of prosperity, there might be others upon which it was not safe to rest. He would not dwell upon this subject, but without advising their entering into an inquiry of an inquisitorial nature, or which might interfere with that free agency which was essentially necessary to the general prosperity of a commercial nation, yet he thought that it was perfectly consistent with that principle that the legisla-
688
ture should inquire whether the banks of issue, exercising as they did one of the royal prerogatives, were conducted upon principles of safety to the interests of the country at large.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonthought that caution and prudence were above all things necessary at the present time, in order that the existing prosperity of the country might be maintained, and that we might not see it succeeded by similar scenes to those that took place in 1825. It was impossible not to be struck with the spirit of speculation that now existed in the country; but he believed that there was a great difference between the present state of things and what took place in 1825. The spirit of speculation was then turned to foreign adventure of the most extraordinary description; but now speculation was directed to home objects; which if pushed too far might be very mischievous, though the consequences might not be quite so mischievous as in 1825; but, really, on turning to any newspaper, or to any price current, and observing the advertisements of joint-stock companies upon every possible subject, however unfit to be carried on in the present state of society, any man must be struck with astonishment at the fever which raged at this moment for those speculations. He felt it his duty some time ago to direct a register to be kept, taking the names merely from the London and a few country newspapers, of the different joint-stock companies, and of the nominal amount of capital proposed to be embarked in them. The nominal capital to be raised by subscriptions amounted to nearly 200,000,000 l. and the number of companies was between 300 and 400. His right hon. Friend just now reminded him of the speculation in France for making beet-root sugar; but that was a sound speculation compared to some of those mentioned in his list. The first was the British Agricultural Loan Company, with a capital of 2,100,000 l. He had been furnished with a blank corn note, issued by this company, which ran in these terms:—
"Exchange. British Agricultural Loan Company. Ten quarters English wheat. London. 18 No. I promise to deliver on demand, to the order of ten quarters of wheat, weighing lbs. per bushel, from the county of and the growth of

689
18, warehoused on the of 18 in sillo on which all charges have been paid up to the 18 20 l. standard value. For the Governor and Directors of the British Agricultural Loan Company. Entered Storekeeper. Secretary."
Another company was proposed for supplying rain-water. Then there was the Patent Steam-paddle Company, with a capital of 30,000 l.; the Safety Cabriolet Company, capital 100,000 l.; the British and American Intercourse Company, capital 2,000,000 l.; the London Whale Fishery Company, capital 600,000 l. And then, to show the way these companies were starting up, for objects either of the most absurd kind, or for objects which private individuals were perfectly able to accomplish, he found the Liverpool British and Foreign Trading Company, capital 250,000 l.. His noble Friend opposite knew perfectly well, that it was not at all an unusual thing for an individual in Liverpool to embark 250,000 l. as a capital in foreign trade; and there were many who had a great deal more engaged in that business. Seeing these things, it appeared to him that the people of this country, having their minds recalled to notions of prudence and caution, was a likely means to put a stop to the evils that must otherwise flow from this state of things. He knew that these companies had not their origin only in London. In 1825, London was the great centre of speculation; but he was afraid that these companies now took their rise in other parts of the country. The right hon. Baronet had referred to a Liverpool paper. He (Mr. P. Thomson) was afraid that the place he represented (Manchester) could furnish as many instances of schemes for objects which could never be beneficial to any one, and in which the parties would only be throwing away their money. The fact was, that the greater part of these companies were got up by speculators, for the purpose of selling their shares. They brought up the shares to a premium, and then sold them, leaving the unfortunate purchasers, who were foolish enough to vest their money in them, to shift as they could. These speculations ought to be checked, otherwise great mischief would ensue from the odium which would be thrown on those joint-stock companies that were a national
690
good. It was well known that most of the great undertakings that had of late years characterised this country, had been achieved by the enterprising spirit of individuals forming themselves into joint-stock companies. Therefore, he felt anxious that the good accruing from companies of this description should not be lost by the discouragement which the setting on foot of these mad and foolish schemes must ultimately occasion to joint-stock companies of real merit. The right hon. Baronet had referred to the state of the joint-stock banks. He (Mr. P. Thomson) had seen also, with great regret, the extent to which joint-stock banks had sprung up in different parts of the country. He believed great good had arisen from joint-stock banks, but the observations he had made with regard to other companies were equally applicable to many of the joint-stock banks that were springing up in different parts of the country, and the existence of which could only be attended with great mischief. He had a prospectus of what was called the English, Irish, and Scotch Joint-Stock Bank, with a proposed capital of three millions in England, two millions in Ireland, and two millions in Scotland; and which held out the greatest possible advantages to the parties engaged in it. The shares too were of very small amount. Indeed, on this point, he had seen some companies with shares as low as 10 l. The great danger of evil arising from speculations of this kind was obvious. But even in those joint-stock banks which were good, and could conduct their business properly, and which had an immense amount of capital laid up, as well as almost inexhaustible credit, there was, he believed, a new element introduced since the last discussions they had had upon this subject, which they must not lose sight of; but which he confessed he knew not how to correct, except through the prudence and greatest caution of the parties themselves. What he meant was this. Parliament had been in the habit of considering it their duty to look most cautiously to banks of issue; but banks of deposit were not thought likely to lead to mischief; and, therefore, that they did not require to be rendered subject to parliamentary control. In fact, there appeared to be little chance of laying any restriction upon their proceedings. He believed that that opinion was correct; but it was subject to this observation, that

691
Parliament looked for security to the prudence and caution of the parties themselves, and to their managing their business upon what he (Mr. P. Thomson) considered to be alone the sound principle for conducting a bank of deposit, namely, of dealing with the capital of their depositors, not their own, and not speculating upon the credit which they might enjoy. Now, a new element had certainly sprung up; and he believed that a great deal was done by these establishments in the way of discounting their own credit. The bills which came into them from their customers, were discounted at a much higher rate of interest than as compared with what would be charged in London, when passing with the credit of an endorsement by a joint-stock bank; and thus a much larger proportion of those bills found currency than would be the case under another system. To that might be attributed, in some degree, the circumstance which they now saw existing—namely, high prices, and the support which was given to the spirit of speculation in the country, unaccompanied as it was with any large increase of issue, either from the country banks of issue, or, in London, by the Bank of England itself. This, in his opinion, was not a safe state of things. As long as the country should go on prosperously, as long as prices kept rising, as long as the first utterer of these bills was able to meet his engagements, so long no disturbance would take place. But let there be a fall of prices, and then, he believed, the penalty which the country would have to sustain, by the encouragement of this false system, would be very great indeed. He believed, that to a certain extent, these banks did great good; but pushed as they were now to so extreme a degree of competition, he was apprehensive that considerable mischief would ensue. He hoped, however, that the prudence and caution of those parties who had so much to lose, would prevent the occurrence of mischief. He confessed, that he regarded, as of much more importance, the system of which he had been speaking, carried, as it had been, to so great an extent, owing to the competition of the joint-stock banks, than the circumstance alluded to by the right hon. Baronet—namely, the regulation under the law for making 5l. notes the limit of issues. He thought if any adversity were to arise, the
692
country would then feel the full benefit of that measure.
Mr. Matthias Attwoodagreed in much of that which the right hon. Gentleman had said on the subject of the mischievous effects which the errors of over-speculation were calculated to produce; but he at the same time thought it should be borne in mind that these errors and blunders were always the necessary and almost unavoidable consequence of a state of things in which enterprise was sure to be too speculative; but there never could be any great and unusual extension of the productive industry of the country unaccompanied by these results. He could not help thinking, however, that much of this cause of complaint arose from defective legislation, and that the time of the right hon. Gentleman, and the attention of the House, might be much more profitably employed in endeavouring to amend the system on which the financial concerns of the country were conducted, than in making unavailing complaints of unavoidable evils. Nor could he avoid adverting to the very extraordinary tone which had been adopted in the course of this debate, as regarded the state of the commercial transactions of the country. It seemed to be assumed that, as compared with countries on the Continent, this country was not prosperous, and that there was at present no secure basis for the very limited degree of prosperity we enjoyed. He, on the other hand, thought that the greater part of the prosperity of the country rested on the surest and most stable foundation—that of the prudence and spirit of enterprise inherent in the community; and he was also of opinion that this spirit of enterprise, if left to itself, uninterfered with by bad financial regulations, would secure a continuance of that prosperity, fixed upon a basis which no merely temporary causes of fluctuation could possibly affect. He thought, there- fore, that hon. Gentlemen opposite, rather than spend their time in enumerating the errors into which the commercial spirit of the people had led them, had better set about framing some more beneficial financial system. He did not so much oppose the arguments which the right hon. Gentleman had used, or the facts he had stated, as he disputed the inferences which he had drawn from them—inferences which he had thought the right hon. Gentleman would not have leant himself to. The right hon. the Chancellor of the

693
Exchequer had entered into a variety of statements, for the purpose of showing, that increased internal prosperity was to be inferred from the increase in exports. He was of opinion that the amount of exports was a very bad test of the commercial advantages derived by the exporters; the real question was, what profit had the people who made the exports received upon them? Increased exportation was proof of increased production certainly; but the amount of importation in return must be looked to in order to ascertain the commercial balance of the transaction. If the amount of exports were to be expressed by sixteen millions, and the amount of imports by four millions, there would be very good ground for the inference of the right hon. Gentleman, that increased exportation was proof of increased production; but he (Mr. Attwood) would require to know what had become of the twelve millions forming the difference, and what advantage the country had derived from an increased export, unaccompanied by a corresponding import? Without then delaying the House, he would only say, that he thought the right hon. Gentleman's view of the exports of the country being a criterion of prosperity, was based on delusion.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerwould not be tempted by any thing that had occurred in the course of the debate, to enter into the general question of the currency; more especially as the House appeared very anxious for the termination of the discussion. He very much regretted that the right hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, was no longer in his place. The right hon. Baronet had confirmed the few hints which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had thrown out—not of alarm and distrust, but of caution and prudence; and it afforded him the highest gratification to find that, in the course which he had felt it his duty to pursue, in this part of his statement, he had been supported by the authority of the right hon. Baronet. He entirely concurred with the right hon. Baronet in his estimate of the advantage the country would derive from the repeal of the duty on raw cotton, supposing the state of its revenue admitted of such a reduction. There was not one word of what had fallen from the right hon. Baronet on this point in which he did not fully concur; but however desirable he might deem such a reduction to be, he could not, with the amount of surplus he had that
694
night announced, take upon himself the responsibility of proposing it. He wished to say one word, in the next place, with reference to what had fallen from his hon. Friend, the Member for Worcester (Mr. Robinson), relative to the Stamp Act, because he knew that if observations coming from such a quarter, remained uncontradicted, they would obtain a considerable degree of currency. The hon. Gentleman seemed to think that the effect of the various details of the Bill would be to add greatly to the whole amount of duty paid. Now, he had brought the fact to a pretty fair test, with reference to one head of revenue at least, and he begged his hon. Friend's attention to the statement he was about to make, because it bore directly upon his argument. He held in his hand an account of the whole amount of stamp duty on bills paid by a very considerable house in the city of London, for one year; and on the other side he had a statement of the exact amount which would have been paid had the regulations he now proposed been in force. Under the old Act, the amount was 1,214 l. 18 s.; under the new one, it would have been 1,196 l. 10 s. 4d. He would now entreat the attention of the House to a little personal matter between his right hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Goul-burn) and himself, which, like all other matters between them, could only be discussed with feelings of mutual good will and regard. His right hon. Friend had adverted to two points:—the one, his own intentions in the year 1830 with respect to the size of newspapers; and the other, the transactions which had lately occurred between himself and the members of the press. He would take each of these points in its turn. His right hon. Friend, he was quite sure, would not suspect him of converting any official information that came within his reach to an uncandid purpose, or of using it in an uncandid manner. But when he had put into his hand a printed copy of an intended Act of Parliament, it would have been the very last thing to enter his mind that it was to be treated as a confidential communication in any shape whatever; more especially as in framing the Bill he had referred to the right hon. Gentleman's labours on the subject, and to the Bills which were in progress at the time of his leaving office. Until his right hon. Friend stated it himself, he could not have believed that he had altered his mind with respect to fixing

695
a limitation of the size of the paper, because the schedule which was annexed to his right hon. Friend's proposed Bill, although it did contain particular provisions with respect to the supplement, they were certainly not the provisions which Mr. Huskisson proposed. [Mr. Goulburn: Yes, they were.] He could not conceive how that could be, because Mr. Huskisson proposed no limitation whatever; whereas, his right hon. Friend's clause applied to a supplement containing a certain number of advertisements, and sold at a particular price; and it contained an enactment specially limiting the size of the paper itself. With these documents before him, he could not suppose that his right hon. Friend had abandoned the intention embodied in them, until he heard it announced by himself. The Act of 1824 limited the size of the papers to 32 inches by 20, but Mr. Huskisson removed that restriction, and allowed newspapers to be printed on paper of any size. Now, in the schedule of his right hon. Friend there was a certain restriction—not with respect to the contents of the supplements, but to the size of the sheets on which they were to be printed, which was specially limited and controlled by the enacting clause of the bill which he then had before him. After the explanation of his right hon. Friend, he could entertain no doubt of his having abandoned this intention, and of his having determined not to bring in the Bill in the shape he originally contemplated. The next point involved a matter of private and individual faith, and he therefore entreated the patient attention of the House. On a former occasion, when the petition of the newspaper proprietors was presented, he took upon himself to express the very great surprise he felt at the course adopted by the individuals who had signed it, because he had been in communication with those individuals throughout the whole proceedings, and because every suggestion upon which he had acted had been adopted with their knowledge. Now, an utter denial had been given to this assertion, and his right hon. Friend had repeated that denial in the House. This being the case, he felt it a duty which he owed alike to himself and to the House, to give the fullest explanation of the whole transaction; an explanation which he trusted the House would admit to be perfectly and entirely satisfactory. The question was, had he really been in communication
696
with the parties who had petitioned the House. Next, with respect to the superficial measurement of the paper, and the limits he had adopted—he had adopted them with their privity and knowledge. It was in the month of July last that he had been first applied to to receive a deputation on the part of the London Newspaper Press, stating the then violations of the law which were constantly taking place, and requesting immediate protection from the infringement of their existing rights. He wrote in reply to that request, as he did to every other of a similar description, that he should be happy to receive the deputation at a convenient period, which he named. The paper he now held in his hand was the paper which was delivered to him as the authority of the deputation. It was signed on the part of The Times, on the part of The Globe, on the part of The Standard, on the part of The Sun, on the part of The Morning Advertiser, on the part of The Age, on the part of The Dispatch, on the part of The Courier, and on the part of The Bell's Weekly Messenger. The deputation stated to him that they represented the newspaper proprietors of the city of London, and he so received them. He gave them an answer with respect to the then state of the law, with which it was immaterial to trouble the House; and he developed to that deputation, in July last, the very scheme he had now opened for the reduction of the permanent duty, of which communication he now found a pencil note on the back of the paper. Subsequently, the chairman of that meeting wrote to see him again on the part of the newspaper proprietors of the city of London. He saw him repeatedly afterwards, not singly, but with five or six other gentlemen; he was always admitted to see him, for he had made it a rule to receive, not only the friends to the entire repeal of the tax, but those who were opposed to it. These gentlemen attended in Downing-street, and saw him, always representing that they were the committee—the same committee emanating from the meeting of newspaper proprietors of the city of London, whose paper he now held in his hand. He held also in his hand a suggestion which was left with him by those gentlemen connected with the alteration of the measurement. It was contained in the following resolution:—"Resolved, on the motion of Mr. Bell, seconded by Mr. Shaw, that a depu-

697
tation be instructed to take with them copies of the old and new Bell's Messenger, to present to the Chancellor of the Exchequer at their next interview, and to request the right hon. Gentleman to extend his proposed limitation of size to the superficial admeasurement of those papers." This resolution was carried unanimously and signed by the chairman, and he was informed by that chairman that the original document was signed by one of the parties representing one of the papers which had petitioned that House, who now denied, through his right hon. Friend, ever having had any intercourse with him, and protested against the change he proposed. There might be altogether a mistake in the matter, these gentlemen might have falsely represented themselves to him; but his right hon. Friend, from his habits of official business, must know, that under the circumstances he could do nothing but believe that those who told him they represented the press, and that the voucher originally brought to him, as their authority, signed by the parties interested, was a voucher which accompanied them throughout the whole transaction; and therefore that he was justified in stating that he was acting with their knowledge and privity. He would not trouble the House further; he had felt it necessary to make a full explanation, and he was obliged to his right hon. Friend for having afforded him an opportunity of doing so. The parties could refer to their own chairman, and the members of the deputation who had waited on him, both of whom would repeat the whole statement he had now made. He felt it incumbent upon him to enter into it; it was important to himself, as involving a matter of personal faith and personal feeling. With reference to any statements that had been made elsewhere, he would only say that he should not have noticed them, but as his right hon. Friend had given him the opportunity of meeting an assertion in that House, he trusted the House would see that he had done no more than his duty in stating the facts as they had occurred.
Mr. Goulburnwas understood to say that the deputation appeared only to have included one of the petitioning parties.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerreplied, two.
Mr. Goulburn: Well, at least the Morning Post and Morning Herald were not stated to be represented.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer: Yes, they were stated to be represented, but no signatures on their part were added to the list which he had read.
Mr. Goulburnknew nothing further on the subject, but what he gathered from communications which had been made to him in the course of the evening, by different gentlemen, who asked him to state that they had not authorized or assented to the proposition of his right hon. Friend with regard to the size of newspapers. That his right hon. Friend believed the deputation to represent those parties there could be no doubt. With respect to the other point on which the right hon. Gentleman had touched, he had found in his office the original draught of the bill, as prepared for consideration and revision, and the right hon. Gentleman had availed himself of the clauses as they stood in that draught to support the arrangement which he had adopted, but which was not borne out by the schedules actually submitted to the House. He had not intended to propose any limitation in the size of the paper; he had intended to submit a proposal, and to call on the House to approve it, which should contain no limitation whatever. His right hon. Friend would imply, that after bringing forward the general plan, it was his (Mr. Goulburn's) intention to ask the consent of the House to a clause limiting the size of newspapers, and the tendency of producing this paper, found in the office of the right hon. Gentleman, was to raise an idea that he meant to deceive the House. Now, he could assure them that he never had any such intentions; and he wished to set himself right with the House on this point. The words of the schedule were—"Newspaper containing public news, intelligence, or occurrences, or any remarks or observations thereon, or upon any matter in Church or State, with or without advertisements; (that is to say) for every sheet, half sheet, or other piece of paper, whereof the same shall consist, 4d. duty." The House would see that there was no limitation here.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that the clause he had found in his office contained an express provision that no newspaper should be printed on any sheet or piece of paper exceeding 41 inches in length, and 26 inches in breadth. He had no doubt that his hon. Friend had no more intention of bringing forward this proposition than he had stated to the house. He was perfectly satisfied with his right hon.

699
Friend's explanation; he never could have produced the clause for the purpose of asserting that his right hon. Friend meant to deceive the House. He had alluded to it for the purpose of supporting his own arrangement. There would have been no necessity in the bill of the right hon. Gentleman to say a word about a supplement, if the sheet had been originally intended to be of unlimited size, and in the bill of Mr. Huskisson, which allowed sheets of any size to pass free of duty, there was no necessity for the mention of any restriction.
Mr. Goulburn:—The words in his schedule were precisely as set down in Mr. Huskisson's Act, and that measure contained no limitation whatever.
Mr. Baineswished to ask some questions of the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer relative to three points of his financial statement. He begged to inquire whether the duty on both descriptions of paper was to be reduced; and also if the discount of 20 per cent. now allowed on the newspaper stamps would be continued in the new scale of duty. The other point to which he wished to draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention was this—they had heard that it would be extremely desirable to reduce the taxes on raw materials, and particularly on cotton wool; now there was also a duty on the introduction of sheep's wool, and he hoped that they would be taken into consideration. He wished for the reduction of both taxes; the same principle was applicable to each; the effect of their reduction would be to relieve manufactures from the pressure of the import duty on the raw material.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that he meant to fix the duty on all classes of paper at 1½d. per pound, which would equalize the whole of the duty. With respect to the second question, as to the allowance of a discount of 20 per cent. on newspaper stamps, he had stated it to be his intention to propose a certain duty; he meant a certain duty in actual receipt.
Mr. David Rochethought that the newspaper proprietors in Ireland had not been fairly treated, as they were not to receive a reduction of duty proportionate to that extended to England and Scotland. He begged to call the right hon. Gentleman's attention to the propriety of making a still further reduction in the tax on glass.
Sir John R. Reidwished to know if the right hon. Gentleman had included relief to the Danish claimants in his Budget.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerdid not know if he had quite understood the question of the hon. Baronet. He could state that he had placed on the table an estimate of a vote of 78,000 l. additional for the relief of the Danish claimants. Provision would thus be made for those who had lost their property on shore; and last year compensation had been granted to those who had lost their goods on shipboard. He regretted that it was quite impossible for him, with the surplus he had already stated, to enter into the question of the glass duty. His hon. Friend behind him (Mr. Roche) should recollect that Ireland had suffered most severely, not from an equality, but an inequality of duty. An inequality could not exist, unaccompanied by a system of drawbacks; and it was under such a system when the manufacturers of England traded, not for the price of their goods, but for the drawback, that Irish manufacturers had become nearly extinct.
Colonel Sibthorpsaid, that the right hon. Gentleman seemed to have completely forgotten the agricultural interest, whose claims he (Colonel Sibthorp) had so long pressed on the attention of the House. With regard to the stamp duty on newspapers, he considered that the reduction of that tax would be in effect admitting that the power of the law was not sufficiently great.
Mr. Blamirewas anxious to direct the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the propriety of making certain modifications in those restrictions on the manufacture of malt, which were found to be so onerous and oppressive.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that the subject was not altogether new to him, and had been already under consideration. The restrictions were in themselves undoubtedly a great evil, and only to be justified with a view to the protection of the revenue. The Ministers were as much interested in the question as any individual Member was, for when the restrictions were rigidly enforced with regard to some persons, and successfully infringed by others, the honest man would be ruined, with profit to the rogue. He should be most glad to receive any communications on this subject, and would give them his careful attention; and if the operation of the regulations could be relaxed in any way, without injury to the revenue, he would readily consent to it.
Mr. George F. Youngwas sorry that the

701
right hon. gentleman had not thought fit to grant any relief to the shipowners, but he still hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would be disposed to take the subject of marine insurances into his favourable consideration, not only for the sake of the shipowners, but on those sound principles of financial policy on which he had acted in reference to the newspaper duty. The consequence of the present high rate of duty was, that parties were effecting their insurances in foreign countries, and the revenue derived from this source was dwindling away. With respect to the question asked by the hon. Member for Dover as to the Danish claims, he trusted that, as the right hon. Gentleman was proceeding in the path of justice to those who had suffered by the outrageous proceedings in 1807. as he had last year relieved those who had claims arising from book debts, and as he proposed this year to give compensation to those whose goods had been confiscated on shore, he would next year consider the claims of the unfortunate individuals whose ships were seized in Denmark at that period. If no other hon. Member brought forward the question, he should certainly feel it his duty to submit it to the notice of the house. He begged to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the estimate of the claims which had been prepared, was an equitable or a legal one?
The resolution was agreed to.
The House resumed.

BISHOPRIC OF DURHAM.
Lord John Russellmoved the further consideration of the Report on the Bishopric of Durham Bill.
Mr. Arthur Trevormoved as an amendment that it be recommitted. He strongly objected to that part of the Bill which totally abolished Local Courts in th e County of Durham; for he believed the great majority of the inhabitants of that district were decidedly against their abolition, and he felt it his duty, in the discharge of that duty which he owed his constituents, to move the recommittal of the Bill, in order to the striking out of that objectionable clause.
Colonel Sibthorpseconded the amendment; he thought such an important Bill ought not to be brought under the consideration of the House at such a late hour, and with so thin an attendance.
Mr. Peasesaid, that he was decidedly in favour of the principle of this Bill, viz. the separation of the ecclesiastical from the
702
civil jurisdiction of the county of Durham. But notwithstanding the amendments that had been introduced into the Bill in Committee, he fully concurred with the hon. Member who had moved the amendment as to the expediency of abolishing the Local Courts of that district. He (Mr. Pease), however favourable he might be to the general principle of centralization, thought that, in this instance, the principle was carried too far as to the juridical powers affected by this Bill; and believing as he did that the majority of the inhabitants of the county of Durham were strongly opposed to the abolition of their Local Courts, he hoped the noble Lord would allow him an opportunity in the recommittal of the Bill to state his objections to the clause which enacted that abolition. If not, he should feel bound to support the amendment of the hon. Member for the city of Durham.
The Solicitor Generalsaid, it could not be contended at this time of day, that the Ecclesiastical dignitary of the county of Durham should be left in possession of those temporal powers and that temporal jurisdiction which belonged to him in former times. The only question, then, was, whether in making that alteration which the Bill proposed to effect and which on all hands, was allowed to be a necessary alteration, they should take that step which the Bill proposed to take. Now, the object of the measure was to place the county of Durham in the same situation as the other counties, and it was absurd to suppose they were doing more in the case of the county of Durham than had already been done with respect to the county palatine of Chester, and the principality of Wales. For his part, he could not understand what advantage was to be derived from the recommittal of the Bill, and he hoped it would be allowed to pass the present stage.
Mr. Alderman Thompsonassured the House that the inhabitants of the county of Durham were greatly opposed to the abolition of the Local Courts. These Courts had been long of great advantage to the county; and although he fully agreed that the separation of the temporal and ecclesiastical jurisdiction might be beneficial, he still thought that they would be wrong if they were to deprive the inhabitants of the county of Durham of an advantage which they had so long possessed and so highly prized, especially after the dissatisfaction which it was well known the change in the principality of Wales had created. He certainly should support his hon. Friend

703
if he persisted in. moving the recommittal of the Bill.
Mr. Goulburn'thought,' that 'after what had passed the' noble Lord ought to consent that the Bill should be recommitted. If a change were called for, that change should not be effected against the wish of the in- habitants of the county.
Lord John Russellsaid, that after what j had passed he would consent to the Bill being recommitted, but in doing so he must take leave to deny that the change which had taken place in the administration of justice in England and Wales had been productive of any dissatisfaction whatever.
The House resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.
On the 3d Clause relating to the abolition of Local Courts, being put,
Mr. Arthur Trevorsaid, that it would be his bounden duty to give this clause the most determined opposition in his power. He had presented petitions against it, and he must say that it was a gross and scandalous act of injustice to deprive men of their just emoluments, against whom there did not exist even the pretence of improper conduct. The returns on the Table of the House proved the great advantage to the county of Durham of its Local Courts, and he should therefore move that this clause be expunged from the Bill.
Mr. Humeunderstood that the removal of the present was to be followed by the establishment of other Local Courts, and if that was the case one great objection to the Bill would be got rid of.
Mr. Peasesaid, that if such an understanding existed it would decidedly obviate the objections which were generally entertained against this measure. There was no imputation against those Courts that they did not administer justice impartially, clearly, effectually, and economically, and, therefore, it would be unfair to take them away without giving a substitute for them. He, however, was opposed to the principle of centralisation embodied in this Bill.
Mr. Harlandalso expressed a hope that the county of Durham would not be deprived of the benefit of its Local Courts.
The Solicitor-Generalsaid, that at all events, it could not be contended that the Court of Chancery of Durham was not a merely nominal jurisdiction, or that the whole of the extensive machinery of that Court was not utterly useless to the inhabitants of that county. It would be highly injurious that after the abolition of the political jurisdiction of the Bishop, such a large and
704
cumbrous machinery should be kept up. The legal jurisdiction should be assimilated to that of other counties; and there was no reason why the same alteration should not be made in Durham as was effected, and usefully, in Chester; the jurisdiction was quite obsolete, and ought no to be retained.
The Committee divided on the Clause.—Ayes 60; Noes 19; Majority 41.
The remaining clauses were agreed to. The House resumed.

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a first time:—Insolvent Debtors' (Ireland); Instrument of Sasine (Scotland).
Petitions presented. By the Bishop of LONDON and several NOBLE LORDS, for Measures for the Better Observance of the Sabbath.—By Lord HATHERTON, from Tunbridge Wells, Wellingborough, and Tunbridge, for the Repeal of the Duty on Newspapers.—By Lord HATHERTON and several other NOBLE LORDS, from various Places, against the Punishment of Death for any Crime but Murder.—By the Earl of WARWICK, from Warwick, for the Alteration of the Ecclesiastical Courts' Consolidation Bill as relates to the future Grant of Probates of Wills.—By the Duke of CLEVELAND, from various Places, in favour of the Municipal Corporations' Bill (Ireland).

CONSTABULARY (IRELAND) BILL.
Viscount Duncannon Viscount Duncannon moved the Order of the Day for receiving the Report of the Constabulary (Ireland) Bill.
Report brought up and read—several amendments agreed to.
The Duke of Leinsterproposed the insertion of a clause such as was introduced into all former Bills, referring to secret societies, that Freemasons be exempted from taking the oath that they do not belong to any secret society.
The Earl of Winchilseasaid, that he could not see why, if secret societies were to be objected to at all, freemasons should be exempted from that objection.
Viscount Melbournereferred to an Act of 1794, and was understood to say that the Freemasons' lodges were generally considered not to be political societies.
The Earl of Rodensaid, that although the Freemasons' lodges were not political societies at present, they might, at any future period, become so, and prove a very dangerous body, over which the Government would have no control. He thought, therefore, that there would be great danger in admitting the proposition of the noble Duke.
The Duke of Richmondwould support the amendment unless, very strong proof were brought of the likelihood of Freemasons' lodges being turned to political purposes.
The Earl of Radnorsaid, there was one ground upon which he thought it would be hard to prevent a Freemason from being
614
admitted into the constabulary body-namely, that, if he was rightly informed, a man who had once become a freemason, could never by any possibility, withdraw himself from that body, whereas with Orange lodges, and other secret societies, this was not the case.
The Earl of Haddingtonthought the constabulary force of Ireland should be kept free from all secret societies whatever.
Lord Ellenboroughproposed to introduce an amendment upon the clause of the noble Duke, with a view to extend the exemption only to such Freemasons as now actually belonged to the constabulary force, but not to any future appointments.
The Duke of Leinstersaid, that, belonging as he did to a secret society, he was not at liberty to enter into any particulars in respect to them, but was understood to assure the House that there was nothing of a political tendency in the proceedings of Freemasons' societies
The Earl of Winchilseasaid, he hoped his noble Friend would take the sense of the House upon his amendment, if the noble Duke opposite was not prepared to agree to it, for he had read a report of a political speech, said to have been delivered at a Freemasons' lodge.
Viscount Strangfordsaid, it was perfectly impossible that any speech delivered at a Freemasons' lodge could have been reported.
The Marquess of Londonderrysaid, that knowing as he did what secret societies were, he must insist upon the principle of applying the same regulations equally to all of them. He hoped that his noble Friend would persevere in pressing his amendment, and that if it were carried, the noble Duke would be content to receive his amended clause as an instalment, as was then generally said of amendments of the kind, and be satisfied.
The Earl of Winchilseaexplained, that he had read the report of a speech made by the Noble Grand Master of the Freemasons of Ireland; and added, that unless the noble Duke opposite agreed to the amendment proposed by his noble Friend upon his clause, he should oppose the clause altogether.
The Earl of Riponsaid, that of the two propositions he should rather prefer the clause us it stood, because if it were admitted that there was no danger in permitting Freemasons to remain in the constabulary who happened to be there

615
already, he could not see that any objection could be urged against admitting others of the same body.
The House divided on the Duke of Leinster's clause. Contents 44; Not Contents 41: Majority 3.
The report was received.

ECCLESIASTICAL FUNDS (IRELAND).
The Earl of Riponwished to call the attention of their Lordships to what appeared to him to be a most important subject. Their Lordships Mould recollect, that his Majesty was graciously pleased, at the beginning of this Session to recommend to Parliament the subject of tithes in Ireland; and, in all probability, an attempt would soon be made to give effect to that recommendation. It was, therefore, indispensably, necessary that the House should be previously furnished with the requisite information for explaining the whole of this question. To enable their Lordships to come to a sound decision, the motion with which it was his intention to conclude, had for its object to bring before the House some information of which, at present, it was not in possession. He apprehended that under the peculiar circumstances belonging to the question of tithes in Ireland, it was impossible to enter upon its discussion without taking into consideration, not merely what might be the best mode of proceeding as regarded not only the owner of tithes, but also the payer of the tithes; not only what was the best mode by which that property might be secured and realized, but also the present condition generally, and the future prospects, of the Church. It appeared to him that it was the more incumbent upon them to take this view of the question, particularly if it should happen that any proposition were to be made to their Lordships that should involve an appropriation of sums for any purposes not belonging to the Church—for an appropriation of any portion of the tithes; and, above all, it was necessary for them to look to this, if it should happen that such a proposal was founded on the assumption that there existed a surplus in the funds of the Church. It appeared to him to be the more necessary to do this whenever they were called upon to discuss that proposition, to which he was not going to advert further on the present occasion. It was the more necessary, whenever they were called upon to do so, that they would bear in mind the condition of the Church, the means of maintaining it; and when the question of tithes came before them, it
616
must be the more necessary for them to keep those points in view. Their Lordships would see that the question of adequacy or inadequacy of Church property, involved not merely what was required by the clergy, but what was required for worship. It appeared to him that there was a great mistake committed by those who talked upon that subject. When Church property was mentioned, persons seemed to consider it as if it belonged to the individuals now receiving the revenues derivable from it. He thought that such persons took a most erroneous view of the matter. The Church property was not the property of individual ministers of the Church; but it was the property of the whole body of Christians professing that particular creed. It was true that the law regulated the disposal of that property with a view to the public advantage. That was the great object for which it was interfered with—for the public advantage, and for the benefit of the Church. That property belonged to the Church—a Church united to which there are 853,000 souls, and to whom the present appropriation of this property was of vital importance, and who never would consent to alienate it for any other purpose. It would then be a question which their Lordships, he was sure, would weigh well, how they were to treat that property. He was sure that their Lordships would never consent to its application to any other purposes than those legitimately and truly belonging to the Church. Now, so far as regarded that part of the question, that belonging to the income of the clergy as it now stood, they had information, he believed, on the Table of the House sufficient for them thoroughly to understand that portion of the subject. A Commission had been appointed five or six years ago to inquire into the revenues of the Archbishops and Bishops and the various dignitaries of the Church. Another Commission was appointed in 1834, which took upon itself the rather affected title of Commissioners of Public Instruction; and it could not be doubted, that those Commissioners together gave a great deal of useful information concerning the parochial clergy of Ireland, the limits of cures and benefices, and the number of the congregations, so that on that subject information was not required. There was another branch of the subject to which a great deal of attention ought to be paid, and on which the information was very far from being complete—it was that which respected the portion of the Church revenue, applicable to the per-

617
formance of divine worship, and to the payment of the inferior officers of the Church, such as clerks and sextons, together with the increase of small livings, the providing a decent residence for the clergy, and decent places of worship for divine service, where-ever the wants of a growing congregation required new churches. It was manifest that these were material objects to be considered, objects without which divine service could not be properly performed. Now the information their Lordships had at this moment was not sufficient for them to understand the whole of this case. It was not that they were without all information; because it was perfectly true that Commissioners had been appointed in 1833, under the Church Temporalities Act. They had laid upon the table two Reports of their proceeding, but the last Report of those Commissioners did not bring any information beyond August 1835; and the object of his motion was this—he wished to call for an account of the funds at the disposal of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in Ireland, and their revenues and expenditure from August last up to May in the present year. That Act (the Church Temporalities Act) had made the most important changes in Ireland, and amongst them not the least inconsiderable was the relief which it had afforded to those not connected with the Church, on removing that which had been stated in 1825 to be one of the great grievances under which they laboured—the payment of church-cess. That Act was also one of regulation for the church itself. It relieved the people from church-cess calculated to excite much ill blood and render the Church odious. So far, the Act was a relief to one party, but then it deprived the Church of all the advantages which it derived from the tax then levied. For the tax that was taken, it was proposed to impose a tax upon all clergymen whose income exceeded 300 l. a-year. In addition to that, it, as some said, suppressed, but as he should apply the word, it "amalgamated" no less than ten bishoprics, and the possessions belonging to them were assigned to the Commissioners. For what objects were the funds thus given to the Commissioners to be applied? To provide an adequate maintenance for the poorer clergy, to provide suitable residences, to uphold proper places of worship, and other requisites without which any Church, whether established or not, could not be properly preserved. It was for purposes of vital consequence to the Church, The funds of the Church were
618
by that Act made applicable to Church purposes. The preamble of the Act declared that it was expedient that first-fruits should be abolished, and an annual tax be substituted in lieu thereof; that a compulsory assessment—by vestries, for certain purposes should be put an end to; and also, as the number of bishops was about to be diminished, their revenues should be applied to the building, rebuilding, and repairing of churches, and to such like ecclesiastical purposes; and for the augmentation of small livings, and such other purposes as might be conducive to the advancement of, and effectual permanency and stability of, the Established Church in Ireland. Was it possible, he would ask, for words to describe more distinctly what were the objects of the Act, or to place those objects beyond the possibility of a doubt? It was upon the words of the preamble that he relied; and he begged to ask again, upon what other principle was it that the Act was recommended and vindicated against the objections urged, with no small zeal and ability, in opposition to it? It had been, it would be remembered, discussed for three days before their Lordships, and the principle laid down by its supporters was, that it would benefit the Church. It was described by its opponents to be a measure fraught with the most formidable danger to the Established Church, if not directly aimed at its destruction. But how was that argument met? First, by the denial that such was the object of the Bill; and, secondly, by the statement that its practical effects would be diametrically the reverse. Their Lordships were asked.—what would have been the condition of the Church, and its capacity to cope with the dangers to which it was stated to be exposed, if 'at the time of the Union such a Bill had been passed; if, as provided in that Act, so many thousands a-year had been assigned for the building of new-churches, so many to the erection of glebe-houses, so many to the increase of small livings? It was further contended, that the benefits of the Bill would not be confined to the Church alone, but would be extended to the Roman Catholic population itself, who (it was maintained) were deeply interested in the respectability of a resident Protestant clergy; and, finally, the argument in favour of the Bill was wound up by asserting that a resident parochial clergy would be most beneficial in its results; that even, though they might not be the ministers to the greater part of their parishioners, their utility would be very

619
great; that the Protestant clergyman would be to his parishioners a minister of peace, for that he would, by his station and constant residence, have opportunities of conciliating their goodwill, by sympathizing with their wants, their cares, and their necessities, and by the performance of a variety of good offices, the importance of which (it was truly said) it would scarcely be possible to exaggerate. He had entirely concurred in those arguments, and he was entitled to conclude that they influenced the final decision of the House, because, after a long discussion and a vigorous opposition, the Bill was passed into a law. The Act bore upon the face of it that it was a Parliamentary contract; he so considered it; and until this contract was completed the Church did not obtain that which it was positively entitled to, and which their Lordships were bound in honour to see effected, and before which they could not take away any portion of its property. What, then, was the actual condition of the funds? He was not going to throw any blame upon the Commissioners, he believed they had done all they could; and if they had not succeeded in completing all the purposes assigned to them, it was not their fault; because, from the very nature of the provisions of the Church Temporalities' Act, and the peculiar circumstances of the case, their resources bore no relation to the extent of the demands upon them. But their Lordships would bear in mind that the objects for the promotion of which the Commission was constituted, were declared by the Act itself (as he had before stated) to be essential to the efficiency, the permanency, and the stability of the Established Church in Ireland. It was stated, on the one hand, when that Bill was first introduced, that the funds that would be at the disposal of the Commissioners would ultimately amount to a very considerable sum; whilst, on the other hand, the estimated expenditure which the Commissioners would have to meet out of those funds, would also be very considerable. It was supposed that 50,000 l. a-year would result from the consolidation of the bishoprics; that the tax on the remaining bishops would produce 4,600 l. per annum; the tax on incumbents 41,800 l., and the interest of the money to be obtained from the sale of perpetuities 40,000 l.; and the result of the whole, including one or two other items which it was not necessary at present to mention, would be, taking into consideration the effect of the arrangements made with respect
620
to the Archbishop of Armagh, the Bishop of Derry, and some antecedent contracts of the Board of First Fruits—the result of the whole would be about 156,840 l. The charge was estimated in this way:—The sum necessary to make up what had formerly been derived from church-cess was 60,000 l. a-year, to provide for the repairs of the church, and every thing necessary for the ordinary performance of public worship; the augmentation of small livings required 46,500 l.; for building churches, 20,000 l.; glebe-houses, 10,000 l.; making a total of 136,500 l. He was perfectly aware that this statement had, from subsequent information, been proved not strictly accurate. First of all, the amount assumed as likely to be derived from the tax on incomes, was greatly overrated at 41,800/.; whereas the greatest amount that could in any imaginable circumstances, accrue was 32,000 l. Another Act placed at the disposal of the Commissioners a fund which was estimated to amount to 22,000 l.; but the Commissioners very fairly stated, that they had no means of ascertaining whether that was an accurate statement, and it was therefore impossible to say that the fund would ever be realized. On the other hand, material items of expenditure had been omitted; the expense, for instance, of the Commission itself, which in August, 1835, was not less than 12,000 l., and therefore the balance might turn out pretty nearly as he had before estimated it. But there was this remarkable circumstance to be taken into consideration—that while the objects to which it was intended those funds should be applied were of urgent, pressing, and immediate necessity—many of them which could not be dispensed with, the funds themselves were distant, uncertain, and remotely contingent; and the Bill, therefore, contained a clause authorzing the Commissioners to begin their operations by incurring a debt; and up to August last, not only were their funds insufficient to meet the charges previously defrayed by the vestry cess, but there was not a single farthing for any of the other great and important objects for which the Bill was passed and the Commission instituted. The first Report of the Commissioners stated their receipts, as derived from all sources, for the year ending August 1, 1834, at 68,728 l., and their expenditure at 51,043 l.—thus leaving an apparent balance in their favour of 17,685 l. But there were two sums included in their

621
receipts which were not properly to be classed as income.—the sum of 46,000 l. borrowed from the Government, and the sum of 2,365 l. derived from the sale of perpetuities, which sum, so obtained, was originally destined to be vested in some securities bearing interest, and not to be applied as income and current expenditure. If these two sums, amounting together to 48,365 l., were deducted from the above sum of 68,728 l., their real receipts for that year would not exceed 20,365 l. Instead, therefore, of a balance of 17,000 l. in favour of the Commissioners, there would be a real balance against them of 30,677 l. in the course of that year. Applying the same principle to the following year, ending August 1, 1835, a corresponding result would be found. The apparent income of that year was stated to be 185,713 l., and the expenditure 120,253 l.; but from the income were to be deducted the following sums—1st, the fictitious balance of 1834, 17,680 l.; 2nd, money borrowed from the public, 46,000 l.; 3rd, money obtained by the sale of perpetuities, 89,552 l.; total, 153,237 l. This would leave their real receipts at 32,476 l. Deducting, on the other hand, from the expenditure the sum of 46,000 l., repaid to the Government, their expenses for the second year would be 74,252 l. The total result of the two years would therefore be as follows:—Expenditure, 125,294 l.—Income, 52,839 l. leaving a deficiency of no less than 72,455 l. Their Lordships would therefore perceive that the means of the Commissioners had been totally inadequate for the purposes for which they had been appointed. By referring to the balance-sheet, their Lordships would find that the greater portion of the receipts which were obtained had been derived from the amalgamated bishoprics. The amount estimated to be derived sooner or later from that source was 50,780 l., and including the archbishoprics of Armagh and Derry to 61,440 l. The total amount received during the year, however, was only 16,000 and odd pounds, leaving a deficit under that head of 45,000 l. or 46,000 l. There had been very heavy charges thrown upon these Commissioners, which he was afraid but too characteristically belonged to that unfortunate country, namely, by the nonpayment of local dues. These had been vehemently and successfully opposed, the consequence of which was, that a very great arrear had been thrown upon the funds of the Commissioners, and they had
622
already paid upon this head 46,000 l. In this manner had been applied the 46,000 l., which they had borrowed from one department of the Government; upon which they availed themselves of another claim on the sum they were entitled to borrow, 100,000 l., which in common parlance was what he would call "flying a kite." Then came the important question of repairs of churches, and it had been said that the longer they were delayed the heavier would be the charge, but the Commissioners had no funds to make those repairs. They stated that one of the most onerous and important duties they were engaged to perform was the repairs of chapels and churches—that they had deemed it prudent to enter into an engagement to the amount of 75,000 l., but that they had not been able to keep that engagement. The Commissioners, however, could not help that. Having borrowed 46,000 l. to pay off the same sum, they were now going to borrow 54,000 l. in order to execute that which they should execute by drawing upon the funds of the church. This he would almost call, though he did not like doing so, a case of bankruptcy. It was, at all events, any thing but a case of financial prosperity. But there were other objects to which their funds were to be applied. The first of these referred to the increase of small livings. Their Lordships were aware, from accounts on the Table, that there were many livings which did not amount to 200 l., many that did not amount to 100 l., and some not even to 50 l., but that altogether there were several hundreds of them which did not amount to 200 l. a-year. One of the objects of this Bill was to give these Commissioners the power of augmenting these small livings. Another important item of their estimated receipts was the tax upon beneficed clergymen of different degrees; this was at first calculated to produce 46,400 l. a-year; but the Commissioners had subsequently, upon more precise information, reduced this estimate to 22,000 l. Still, however, this constitutes an important item in their receipts; and it would not be uninteresting to their Lordships to know how much had actually been received under this head. They would find, then, upon referring to their Report, that, during the year 1834, they received nothing under this head, and, in the year 1835, the enormous sum of 7l. 5s. 7d. Looking, therefore, at these two items of receipt, estimated to produce, ultimately, rather more than 83,000 l. per

623
annum, their Lordships would find that the Commissioners had obtained no more than 16,519 l., or nearly 67,000 l. less than the estimate. Turning from the revenue to the expenditure of the Commissioners, let their Lordships mark what had been the nature of the demands upon them, and the extent to which they had been able to meet them. They stated in their second Report, that "in the year ending August 1st, 1835, they had spent, under the head of things necessary for the celebration of divine service in each church and chapel for the year beginning at Easter, 1834, various sums to the amount of very nearly 30,000 l.;" but they added, "that the payments under this head were not all completed within the year, so that in the current year, 1836, they would have to pay out of the income certain sums really payable for the service of 1835 out of the income of 1835." There was another very heavy charge which had fallen upon the Commissioners, and which deserved particular notice. Their Lordships were aware that from circumstances which in Ireland were but too characteristic of that unfortunate country, the payment of legal dues was in many cases successfully resisted. Accordingly it appeared, that for two or three years before the abolition of the vestrycess, in various parishes that impost had been withheld, and the objects to which it was destined had been left unprovided for. These arrears, though legally due, were remitted to the several parishes in question by a clause in the Church Temporalities' Act, and the payment of them was thrown upon the Commissioners. It appeared, that under this head they had already paid upwards of 46,000 l.; but as their own funds were totally inadequate to meet this charge, they were only enabled to make these payments by borrowing from the Government the above sum of 46,000 l.; thus commencing their operations by incurring a considerable debt. It was true that they had subsequently repaid that sum; but how had they done it? Why, by borrowing it from another department of the Government, under the provisions of another Act of Parliament; and thus adopting in regard to this debt, a course which, in common parlance, is called "flying a kite," paying one debt by contracting another. Another most important item in the regular and ordinary expenditure of the Commissioners was occasioned by the necessary repair of churches and chapels throughout Ireland. This was an object which formerly was provided for
624
out of the vestry-cess, and constituted a principal demand upon that impost. The same circumstances which occasioned the great arrear to which he had just now alluded, caused this also to fall into arrear; so much so, that the exigency of the case became urgent to the greatest degree, and was adverted to with considerable emphasis by the Commission, in a paragraph of their Report, to which he would call their Lordships' attention. The Commissioners described their duty, as regarded this subject, as one of the most onerous and important that they had to discharge. They said that they had obtained detailed estimates of such repairs as ought to be immediately executed, but that, as the state of the funds only admitted of a selection being made of the most pressing cases, and as delay only increased the evil, they had deemed it prudent and indispensable to enter into engagements to the amount of 75,000 l., which engagements they proposed to meet in this way:—they set aside, out of their incoming funds, the sum of 21,000 l., and the remaining 54,000 l. was to be obtained by a loan from the Government, being the residue of a sum of 100,000 l., which the law allows them to borrow, and of which they had previously borrowed 46,000 l. to pay the arrears of vestry-cess. Having thus borrowed the whole sum of 100,000 l. for the execution of a purpose for which that sum was confessedly inadequate, they might be described as being in a state of bankruptcy, and although he might be unwilling to apply to the case so strong an expression, he was, at all events, warranted in contending that they were in anything but a state of financial prosperity. There were, however, other objects of equal importance to which the Commissioners were bound to attend, and in respect to which they laboured under precisely similar difficulties—he alluded, first, to the increase of small livings, one of those points, be it remembered, which were described in the preamble of the Church Temporalities Act as being essential to the efficiency and stability of the Church. Their Lordships were aware, from documents already on the Table, that out of the 1385 benefices in Ireland, there were very many under 50 l. a-year, many under 100 l., many under 150 l., and upon the whole several hundred livings under 200 l. per annum. Surely, 200 l. per annum was but a small pittance for the remuneration of a respectable and well-educated gentleman, called upon by the duties of his situation

625
to reside amongst his parishioners, and to exercise amongst them the rites of hospitality and the obligations of charity? In speaking of this sum of 200 l. a-year, he was not stating merely his own view of what was reasonable, he was founding upon the Act, which although it limited to 200 l. a-year, the sum to which small livings might be augmented, nevertheless exempted from the tax upon benefices all livings under 300 l., thus establishing, by an unquestionable proof, the fact, that Parliament did not deem even 300 l.. to be an unreasonably large income for a clergyman to enjoy. But, then, what had the Commissioners been able to do in this matter?—absolutely nothing! It was true, that in a very few cases some slight augmentation had been afforded by the dis-appropriating benefices from sinecure dignities, and by the application of Bishop Boulter's Fund: but the latter was a private fund of a very limited amount, and the former mode of increase could be applicable to very few cases only. Here, then, were several hundred livings, at least one-third of the whole, with an income confessedly inadequate, and without any existing means of increasing them: and this was a Church described by some persons as wallowing in wealth, degraded by luxurious indolence, and existing with a surplus of revenue. The next topic touched on in the Report was glebe-houses: and their Lordships would find, upon reference to the Report of the Commissioners of Public Instruction, that there were no less than 536 parishes in which there was no glebe-house whatever. Now, he would ask, what was the condition of a clergyman, as an official minister of religion, if he had not a proper residence? How could he be expected to perform his duties towards his flock if the want of a residence interrupted his habitual intercourse with them It was not that he would wish to see the clergy dwelling in palaces of extravagant dimensions; but every consideration of fitness and propriety gave them a right to a comfortable and decent house. The last topic to which he had to advert was Church accommodation, and he must premise that what he was about to notice was independent of any question affecting the keeping in repair existing churches. There were in Ireland 210 benefices out cf 1385 in which there were no churches whatever; and if their Lordships were to look at this question with reference to the number of
626
parishes, and not of benefices, the extent of the deficiency would be greatly increased, and he had no doubt that, at least, 359 or 400 parishes would be found destitute of a church. This was a serious injury to the Church; and the Commissioners felt it to be so, for they spoke of it in their two Reports in very strong terms—
In connexion with the subject of churches, the Commissioners say in their first report, they cannot but express the satisfaction they feel in having to report to your Excellency, that many applications have been made to them for aid for the erection of additional churches; it appearing that the accommodation at present subsisting in those districts or parishes from which the applications have been received, are quite insufficient for the congregation of the Established Church; and whilst the Commissioners have to mention that, in many cases, the parties have expressed their willingness to contribute, or cause to be contributed, certain proportions of the expenses of building, in some cases amounting to a fifth, in some to a half, and in others, to three-fourths of the expenses requisite for the purpose, they cannot but reject that, as their surplus funds alone are applicable to the objects now under consideration, they could hold out no immediate prospect of the application in question being favourably entertained at present. The Board have, however, given every assurance in their power, that as soon as there shall be any available fund for such purposes, these applications shall receive the earliest consideration; and they are fully satisfied, from the inquiries which have been made at this office, that had they been enabled to hold out any present encouragement to the building of churches, the applications on this subject would have been, under such circumstances, far more numerous than those they have now to refer to.
Could anything, in a matter of this kind, more imperatively require assistance than the case he had just stated? The Act authorised, nay, required such assistance to be given; the parties seeking it showed, the sincerity of the feeling with which they urged it, by undertaking to share in the expense; and yet all that the Commission were enabled to answer to their application was, that when they had the means they should be happy to apply them! What he had just stated referred to the year 1834. Let their Lordships' now see how the matter stood in the year 1835. The Commissioners, in their Second Report, expressed themselves as follow:—
The Commissioners have also to state, that applications have been received for aid, not only for the enlargement of several churches,

627
where the accommodation has been reported to be quite insufficient for the respective congregations, but also for the rebuilding or erection of sixty churches; and in many of these applications, the parties have expressed their willingness to contribute sums varying from 60 l. to 600 l.
Here was the same eagerness of application as in the first year; the same readiness to contribute on the part of the applicants. He was not surprised, he confessed, to find, in the First Report, that a negative answer had been given to such applications: but when he read the above paragraph of the Second Report, he did flatter himself that at least a beginning had been made in forwarding this important object; he indulged hopes, that the prospects were more encouraging; but these were wofully disappointed:—
Tolluntur in altum
Ut lapsu graviore ruant.
The paragraph of the Report concluded:—
Several of these applications appeared to be so pressing, that the Commissioners have been induced to direct—
What would their Lordships think?—that assistance should be immediately given?—not at all; but——
—that a special memorandum shall be taken of the cases, in order that, as soon as they have any funds available for such purposes, the wants of the parties may be provided for.
Cold comfort this, for men who were seeking the attainment of an object in which what is most dear and important to them was involved. Cold comfort this, for men whom Parliament itself had taught to believe that adequate church accommodation was essential to the efficiency, the permanence, and stability of the Established Church. All he could say was, that for many years of his life it had been his lot to have at his disposal a share of official patronage; many of his noble Friends on both sides of the House had been similarly situated; and it had frequently happened to him (as doubtless it had to others) to be compelled, upon pressing applications for it, to answer—"I should be very happy if I had it in my power to comply with your wishes; but you may depend upon it that I will make a note of your application." He never knew an applicant satisfied with that answer. Could the Church of Ireland then be satisfied with it? Such, however, was the answer, and not a do it had the Commissioners given for the purpose. This matter derived additional importance from a circumstance to which he could
628
not avoid referring. It had been over and over again stated that the Church of Ireland had failed in its object—that the numbers of its followers did not increase—and that it was preposterous to attempt to bolster up an institution which was so unequal to its professed duties. Was the fact so? By no means. If their Lordships referred to the Reports of the Commissioners of Public Instruction, they would find that, out of 2,405 parishes in Ireland, the members of the Church of England had increased in no less than 1,200 parishes, being one-half of the whole, in the year 1834, as compared with the census of 1831. This fact was an unanswerable refutation of the calumny urged against the efficiency of the Irish Church, and showed the wisdom of the law to which his remarks had applied, in laying the foundation for a provision for the wants of an increasing communion. He felt confident that what he had taken the liberty of submitting to their Lordships ought to be borne in mind in any future discussion upon this subject. He had shown what were the principles, the objects, and the provisions of the Church Temporalities Act—he had pointed out the nature of the arguments by which it was recommended and supported in the House—he had shown the nature of the compact which that Act established between the State and the Church in Ireland—and he had shown how imperfectly, up to this moment, that contract had been carried into effect. It involved an obligation by which the good faith of Parliament was bourn), and which he for one, could not shake off. He should conclude, by moving for an
Account of all receipts and disbursements by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for Ireland, for nine months, ending 1st May, 1836; distinguishing the specific sources from which all monies have been derived, and shewing the total amount derived from each source, and the specific purposes to which the receipts have been applied;—and also, a
Statement of the number of applications made to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for the enlargement, rebuilding, and erection of additional churches, as referred to in their two Reports; distinguishing the locality and diocese of each parish from which the application has been made.
Viscount Melbournesaid, as it was not his wish to throw any obstacle in the way of the motion of the noble Earl, and as it was not his intention to offer any thing like opposition to it, be did not consider

629
it necessary to trouble their Lordships with more than a very few observations on the present occasion. He agreed entirely in the general statement made by his noble Friend. He concurred with his noble Friend when he said, that seeing what was the state of Ireland, and considering the state of the tithe question in that country, it was necessary they should have before them the fullest, clearest, and most distinct information bearing on the subjects that could be obtained. He concurred also in the opinion with which his noble Friend commenced his speech, viz., that it was a narrow, insufficient view, to take of this question, to say that Church property in tithes or in land was in any way to be considered the property of the ministers of religion. He agreed with him that it was the property of the whole of the community, who were bound together in the same bond of religious faith. He agreed with his noble Friend that tithes and other descriptions of Church property were the portion of the national altar, which had been set aside by the institutions of the country, by the piety or superstition of former ages, for the maintenance and security of the Established Church and the established religion of this country; and so being part of the national property, it was in the power of the State to increase it if it were too small, or to diminish it if it were too large, or to distribute it as it pleased, and to apply it to those purposes which were considered the fittest to promote the great end and object which its contributors had in view. He entirely agreed in the principle laid down by his noble Friend; it was indeed, the one which he had always held as the only safe principle on which the Government and the Legislature could proceed with regard to these subjects. He concurred, also, in the history given by his noble Friend of that great Act which passed, he believed, in 1833; he concurred as to the object of that Act and the means provided to effect them> But he must observe that the insufficiency of the funds to be derived under the Act was foreseen. At the time that Act was in this House, it was expected that the funds, in the first instance, and for a considerable period, would be insufficient for the purposes which were contemplated, but when his noble Friend affirmed that the Act was a compact between the Church and the State, he must say, that it was no more a compact than any other Act; and if his noble Friend mean
630
by his assertion, that by passing that Act they entered into an arrangement by which they precluded themselves from entertaining any other measure till all the objects professed in that Act had been carried into effect, he, for one, could not concur with his noble Friend. He conceived the Act to have been passed for the regulation of those matters to which it was to be applied, but it left other matters open for the consideration of the Legislature. He must say, further, he did think that the statement his noble Friend had made, showing what had been the tardiness of the operation of the Act, and its insufficiency for the great purposes which it had in view, was proof and argument that however much some such measure was wanting at the time it had passed, it had proved insufficient for the attainment of the object for which it was introduced. He could not go into the detail entered into by his noble Friend respecting the proceedings of the Commissioners; but agreeing with him, that in all their Lordships' future deliberations on this subject, it was necessary they should carry in their minds the objects of the Act and its operation, he was happy to find that his noble Friend had turned his attention to the question, and had called for information connected with it, which, of course, it would be his anxious wish to assist him in procuring.
Motion agreed to.