Sitting of 21 June 1853

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILL. — 1° Public Libraries (Ireland).

EPISCOPAL AND CAPITULAR PROPERTY.
The MARQUESS of BLANDFORD presented a petition from 800 incumbents of parishes, stating that the endowments of a number of the benefices formed under the Church Building Act did not exceed 13 l. a year, the remainder of the incomes of the incumbents being made up out of the pew rents; that upwards of 4,000 incumbents of parishes in this country were paid by incomes of less than 150 l. a year; praying the House to take into their immediate consideration the inadequacy of the district system to meet the spiritual wants of the population; calling attention to the fact that the Church was already in possession of property sufficient to provide a remedy for these evils; and asking to be allowed to give evidence before the House respecting the matters stated in the petition. The noble Lord then proceeded to say, that in rising to move for leave to bring in a Bill to make better provision for the management of episcopal and capitular property, he would ask for the attention and indulgence of the House while he entered upon a subject wide in its range and most incalculable in its results, and which he felt himself incapable of treating as its importance deserved. In the first place, he would allude to what had been previously done upon the subject of church legislation, and he would endeavour to detail the steps upon which he had been led to make this proposition to the House—one which, he believed, was neither hazardous nor unconstitutional in its character, but which was one of those foundation stones upon which, in raising itself up to meet the exigencies of the times in which we lived, the
506
strengthened and enlarged structure of the Established Church must be based. He would remind the House of some of those great public Acts which had placed the Established Church in its present position. First, he would notice the 58 & 59 Geo. III., by which the Church Building Commissioners were constituted, and 1,500,000 l. applied for church-building purposes. Then there was the important Act the 3 &4 Viet, which reconstituted the Church Building Commissioners; and the 6 & 7 Vict. — commonly called Sir Robert Peel's Act— which first provided for the subdivision of parishes, and a permanent endowment for the districts so created; the Act of 1850, the 13 & 14 Vict. c. 94, appointing a most important body—the Estates Commissioners; and, lastly, the Act of 1851, the 14 & 15 Vict. c. 104, permitting the voluntary enfranchisement of the property of the Church—an Act which has gone far to terminate the injurious description of tenure by which nearly five-sixths of the revenues of the Church have been enjoyed by a large portion of the public. To all these the Bill which he now moved for leave to bring in, was more or Jess immediately connected. But there had been other Acts to which he should also allude, and which had had very important bearings upon the present position of the Established Church. One of those was the Act for the Commutation of Tithes; another was the Act for Preventing Pluralities and Non-residence; and then there was the important Order in Council of 1851, limiting the incomes of the bishops, and fixing them for the future. In addition to these, he must not pass over without remark the efforts of private individuals, among which he must mention especially those made by Mr. Horsman in former years. In 1847 that Gentleman drew the attention of this House to the subject of episcopal incomes. In 1848 he broached the same subject in Parliament, and moved that an Address be presented to Her Majesty for an inquiry into cathedral and collegiate churches, with a view to render them more conducive to the service of the Church, and the spiritual welfare of the people. This Motion, although not in the way Mr. Horsman intended, had been ultimately carried out. In the same year Mr. Horsman moved for an inquiry into the full value of all Church property under lease, in order to render the revenues of the Church more conducive to the religious teaching of the people. In addition to this, in the same year, 1851,

507
this House voted an Address to Her Majesty, praying Her to be graciously pleased to take into consideration the state of spiritual destitution of England and Wales, with the view of providing means for a remedy; and Her Majesty was graciously pleased to state, in reply, that she would gladly give Her consent to well-advised measures for that object. In the following year, he (the Marquess of Blandford) was enabled to introduce a Bill, having for its object the remedying of some of the abuses existing in chapters, together with the increase, where necessary, of the episcopate, and other provisions somewhat similar to those contained in the proposed Bill. The result of that was, that the measure was withdrawn, but a Commission was appointed to inquire into the first two branches which he had proposed should be inquired into—namely, the state of chapters, and the increase, where necessary, of the episcopate; and it was the third of these branches—that connected with the property of the Church—which it was now his intention to bring before the notice of the House. All these things had, in their separate character, and in proportion to their relative importance, tended to bring the Church to its present condition; and regarding as they did its position in this country, he thought it was the bounden duty of the House so to strengthen that position— so to enlarge her structure and secure her foundation—as to make her an efficient instrument, not only to impart those truths for which she was divinely instituted, but also to enable her to maintain her time-honoured position by engaging the rational and well-placed affections of the people. Before he proceeded any further, he would advert to the question which had sometimes been mooted in that House, not only as to whether that House was a place where matters relating to the Church should receive their ultimate sanction, but whether such matters should be here discussed. In doing so, it would be necessary to inquire what were the prerogatives of that Personage under whose high authority that House held its sittings. It had always been their privilege to discuss matters relating to the Established Church, and he thought the House would not be able to resist the conclusion that to bring matters relating to that Establishment before the notice of the Legislature, was neither inconsistent with Parliamentary precedent, nor at variance with the privileges and practice of that House. He would first remind hon. Members
508
of what were the prerogatives of that Personage under whose high authority they were sitting. By the 26 Hen. VIII. it was enacted—
"That the King our Sovereign Lord, his heirs, successors, Kings of this realm, shall be taken, accepted, and reputed the only supreme head on earth of the Church of England, and shall have and enjoy annexed to the Imperial Crown of this realm, as well the style and title thereof, as all honours, dignities, pre-eminences, jurisdictions, & c, to the said dignity of supreme head of the Church belonging and appertaining, and shall have power, from time to time, to visit, repress, redress, reform, order, correct, restrain, and amend all such errors, heresies, abuses, offences, contempts, and enormities, whatsoever they be, which by any manner of spiritual authority or jurisdiction may lawfully be reformed, repressed, ordered, redressed, corrected, restrained, and amended most to the pleasure of Almighty God, the increase in virtue in Christ's religion, and for the conservation of the peace, unity, and tranquillity of this realm, any usage, custom, foreign laws, foreign authority, prescription, or any other thing to the contrary notwithstanding."
It was true that this prerogative might have been abused in subsequent years, and by Parliament might have been subsequently limited; but the effect of whatever limitations were introduced had been to render the intervention of Parliament still more necessary than before in matters relating to the Established Church; and now by the Act of Union the duty of the Sovereign was—
"To preserve and maintain inviolable the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established."
These being the prerogatives of the Crown, how had that assembly, which was convened by sovereign authority, availed itself of its privileges to discuss matter relating to the Church of this country? The beginning of the Reformation was ushered in by debates in that House on abuses in religion. In the reign of Edward VI. was an Act for the Reverend Reception of the Holy Communion. In 1552 a new Book of Common Prayer was discussed, and the
"King, Lords temporal, and Commons, did in God's name require all archbishops, and bishops, and their ordinaries, to endeavour in the due execution of that Act as they would answer before God."
In 1553 the Bishopric of Durham was suppressed, and two new ones were created out of it. In the reign of Elizabeth an Act was passed respecting the Liturgy. In 1571 there was a debate on abuses in religion, with a Bill for reformation of the Prayer-book, and the Articles of Religion

509
were ratified. In the reign of Charles II. a Committee was appointed—
"To compare the Book of Common Prayer sent down from the Lords, and the book sent up from this House, and to make their report thereon with all speed they can."
In 1711, in answer to the thanks of the Lower House of Convocation, for a grant towards the building of churches, that House replied:—
"That this House will in all matters immediately relating to religion, and the welfare of the Established Church, have a particular regard to such applications as shall at any time be made to them from the clergy in convocation assembled, according to ancient usage, together with the Parliament."
Since the closing of Convocation, it had, of course, been necessary that that House should discuss matters relating to the Establishment; but the instances he had given proved that even during the sitting of that body that House was not deterred from exercising its own inherent right, and from discussing matters relating to the Established Church. And he would add, that he thought no surer method could be adopted for depriving Parliament of that right, and for putting the Church on the same level with dissenting bodies in this country, than by so altering the constitution of the British Legislature as to render it a matter of doubt, whether consistency with Christian truth would admit of the introduction of ecclesiastical affairs into an Assembly which had parted with its distinctive Christian character. What was the position of affairs at the present moment? From the year 1818, from which period we might date the commencement of that revived interest in matters relating to the spiritual wants of this country, a variety of Acts had been passed relating to the building of churches, the subdivision of parishes, the prevention of non-residence and pluralities, and to the supplying, in a variety of ways, of the spiritual wants of this country, all which had kept one loading principle prominently in view—the strengthening and maintaining of the important machinery of the parochial system. He did not wish to ignore those two other great branches of the systen—-the episcopate and the chapters; but, in bringing a subject of this nature before the House, he believed that by laying great stress upon the wants of the parochial system, if he should be enabled to do anything towards the supply of those wants, he should be equally consulting the benefit of the two other great
510
branches, which together made up the entirety of the Church, and should be also devising a posture for the property of the Church, by which it would be enabled to yield the greatest amount of benefit to succeeding generations. He proposed, in the Bill which he wished to introduce, to transfer the entire management of episcopal and capitular property into the hands of that body, or those members of the Ecclesiastical Commission who were, by a recent Act, constituted the Estates Commissioners. In stating the grounds upon which he made this proposition, he must first ask the attention of the House while he endeavoured to show what was the present position of the property, together with the incomes of the dignitaries in connexion with that body, into whose hands he proposed to transfer the management of the property; and would then endeavour to show the advantages that might be derived from the step he proposed, which, when viewed in connexion with the vast requirements of the present day, rendered it one of primary and paramount importance. It was doubted at the time whether the constitution of the Ecclesiastical Commission warranted such a step; but a Committee was appointed to inquire into the mode of managing Church property, and the result of that Committee was the appointment of the Estates Com-mission, consisting of three members of high character—two being appointed by the Crown, and one by the Archbishop of Canterbury; and he need scarcely add that they were gentlemen whose characters entitled them to the very highest consideration; and when they considered their very close connexion with the other members of the Ecclesiastical Commission, there was a reasonable inference that in any future appointments a due regard would be had to the feelings of those with whom they were brought into immediate action. He now came to speak with regard to the property itself. Up to 1836 the injurious nature of the tenure by which Church property was held was undisturbed. In that year a Commission was appointed to inquire into the spiritual wants of the country, and thereupon the Ecclesiastical Commission was constituted, who were to receive the surplus of episcopal, capitular, and prebendal property, and to apply it to the parochial wants of the country. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners stated in their Report—
"They felt from the first that the possession of these estates, especially to so large an amount, involved the duty of carefully considering the principle

511
on which they should be managed, and the proper mode of dealing with the tenures upon which they were held by the lessees, and they felt also, that these questions were deeply affected by the responsibilities which the Legislature had devolved upon them, as trustees, for the general benefit of the Church, and more especially of the parochial clergy."
The first great change, therefore, took place when the estates of 336 prebends became vested in the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and an intimation was made that they were ready to commute the estates of the bishops for fixed instead of fluctuating and uncertain incomes. With regard to capitular property, they became entitled eventually to about one-third of the proceeds that were formerly divided among the members of the various ecclesiastical bodies; and here he wished to make a few remarks upon the tenure under which the property had been held. In 1838 and 1839 a Committee sat to inquire into the mode of leasing Church property. Their labours disclosed the fact, that a system of leasing had been shamefully and sinfully recommenced in the Church at the Restoration, and had been continued with the worst and most disastrous effects to the present day. The Committee said—
"Your Committee are prepared confidently to assert, that the system of raising revenue by fines, always improvident, is peculiarly disadvantageous to the church lessor, from the peculiarity of his tenure; and the objections to it are felt in leases for terms, and aggravated most materially in leases for lives."
And they recommended—
"the abolition of the injurious system of fines upon leases for lives, and also upon leases for terms; the substitution of a fee-simple for a leasehold tenure throughout the property of the Church; and an Act to provide for the conversion of Church leasehold into fee-simple, commonly called enfranchisement."
Now the justice of these views had been exemplified in a very remarkable manner, for, ten years afterwards, a Commission, entitled "The Episcopal and Capitular Revenues Commission," was appointed. Before that Commission the system of leasing was again revived, but to be again condemned; and a Bill was accordingly introduced, and the sanction of Parliament was sought to a plan by which it was thought that the system might be perpetuated upon a basis more favourable to the interests of the Church. That sanction was not, however, given; and later in the Session a Bill was introduced to carry out, with the express recommendation of the Committee of 1839, and permit the
512
voluntary enfranchisement of the property of the Church. But in whatever way such a system was exercised, it was equally open to objection. One of the great wants to be provided for was the enrichment of the poorer sees; and in order to effect that, it was necessary that the incomes of the more wealthy ones should be diminished. And the plan, therefore, first adopted was, that the incomes of the richer sees should be assessed, and that the surplus should be paid into the hands of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, that surplus remaining as a fixed charge upon the see. That plan, however, was not found to answer; and then another plan was adopted—that the income should be fixed in future, and that the surplus should be left available. But that plan was also open to condemnation; for it should be remembered, that the bishop or other proprietor of the territorial estate was also a minister of the word of God, and that his time was taken up with other duties totally irrelevant with those imposed by such occupations as that arrangement would have enforced. In addition, however, there was the consideration that the interests of the property might be endangered, because the bishops were selected from a class of men who had little or no knowledge of the management of property; but more especially from the fact, that their attention was more lawfully taken up with spiritual matters. Nor, indeed, was it either consistent with the experience of human nature that men should evince an equal interest in property from which they derived a benefit, and property from which they derived none. Again, as far as the interests of the property itself are concerned, that plan which was anciently bad, and was still most injurious to those interests, was best for the bishop, as interfering least with his other spiritual duties. And, in dealing with this kind of property after such a manner, this anomaly had to be encountered. Did we wish to devolve acts of ownership upon the lessees, then by that system the Church was found to receive only about one-sixth of the value of its estates; and, on the other hand, did we wish to obtain an improved value for the property by bringing a portion of it into hand, then we found, unless some new mode of management were adopted, ecclesiastics and spiritual persons, occupying a position never before held by bishops and others in this country, as the managers of large landed properties, at a time, too, when the growth of population and the

513
increase of intelligence rendered the duties of the present day no fair comparison with those of a former epoch. It was true, indeed, that various opinions had been urged as to whether this property might be managed by the bishops and chapters themselves, under a species of rackrent to these ecclesiastical corporations. But, at the same time, even when that opinion was prevalent, it was admitted that a large amount of agency must be the necessary consequence. However, though a great variety of opinions had been expressed upon the subject, he would content himself by reading the evidence given by the Dean of Carlisle before a Committee of the other House of Parliament. He was asked—
"Do you see any objection to their being the actual proprietors at rackrents?—I do not see any other difficulty than that they might not look sufficiently well after the property.
"That would be obviated by their having a good agent?—Yes, if they looked well after him.
"It would be necessary for them to have a surplus fund to meet the demands that would be made upon them?—Yes.
"In what way do the chapter now carry on the arrangement of such estates as they do look after? Do they meet frequently for the purpose?—They only meet twice a year.
"Do they look minutely into all the circumstances of their several estates?—Certainly not.
"They are not aware precisely of the condition of the properties?—No, very rarely, indeed, are they so.
"If you converted them into immediate landlords they would, probably, look more carefully into their affairs?—Yes, the colleges do so, and I do not see why the chapters should not.
"Is there not a difficulty in comparing a chapter with a college in this point of view—that there is always a constant body resident in a college, whereas in the existing condition of the chapters the members are only successively resident, and therefore you have not any constant body always at hand?—The property of the college is almost entirely managed by the head of the college and the bursar; probably only by one person.
"Suppose in the month of January there is a communication from a tenant, Canon A. being then resident; and the next communication between the same tenant and the chapter is in the month of April, when Canon B. is resident, would not that give rise to difficulty?—Yes; it must be done by one person, and that person would naturally be the dean.
"You say that the present system is inconvenient, and sometimes places the chapter in a difficult position. Would not the yearly communications, and the almost daily communications which must pass between the tenants at rackrents and the chapter, be still more inconvenient than the still more infrequent communications which now take place relative to the renewal of leases? —They might.
"Would not they trespass more upon the time of the functionaries?—They certainly would.
"Might not they occasionally place them in situations of inconvenient collision with the ten-
514
antry?—They might; but I think they are in a very unpleasant position at present.
"Situations of collision would be inconsistent with the position and the dignity of the chapter? —I think they might have that effect.
"Do you not think that where land is held at rackrent, there necessarily arises between the landlord and the tenant a continual cause of pecuniary discussion and negotiation, which it would be very desirable to avoid between the clergy and the laity?—I was bursar of Baliol College for two years, and I never experienced any such difficulty, nor did I ever hear of any on the part of the master and fellows.
"Is there not a considerable distinction between a body of clergy who are acting in the capacity of a college, and a body of clergy in general who are acting in their spiritual capacity of ministers of religion towards the community at largo?—I suppose there is.
"So that it might not be inconvenient that there should be these daily pecuniary negotiations between a college and the laity; but great inconvenience might still arise if these pecuniary negotiations existed between the working clergy generally and the laity?—Yes."
Such was the evidence of the Dean of Carlisle; and here he need scarcely repeat that the same arguments that applied to the property held by chapters applied to other cases also. The constant tendency of all past legislation, as of all future legislation would no doubt be, was to limit and fix the incomes of the dignitaries of the Church; and where that was the case it necessarily followed that the management of the property should be entrusted to other hands. And if it was considered an answer to that conclusion that a sufficient amount of estate might be assigned to each corporation to yield the stipulated income, then he (the Marquess of Bland-ford) would put it to the House whether it was consistent with either the advantage of the property itself, or the interest of its possessors, that large landed estates should be managed at a rackrent by those whose calling had been laid in a much higher sphere, and whose duty it was to feed the flock of God? He now came to the second class of reasons which he adduced for the step he proposed—that was, the advantages that would accrue from it when taken in connexion with the vast requirements of the present day. He had before stated that that point to which he wished principally to direct attention was the strengthening and establishing that great machinery so essential to the preservation of our national religion and piety, namely, our parochial system; and he believed that if this were effected, the other great branches of our Church, namely, the episcopate and the chapters,

515
would not want in those proportions which were necessary to sustain and complete the whole. The working of the parochial system was perhaps little seen, and few perhaps of those effects which really flow from it were attributed to it; but they could not doubt, that it had contributed, under the hand of God, to the cultivation of the temper and moderation of the people, and had been the cause of much of that social blessing with which this country had been so highly favoured. That House had, on different occasions, been forward to promote the building of churches, and where these had been erected, it had followed as a matter of course almost, that parishes and districts had been formed; the building too of churches, and the location of ministers of the Church in thickly populated places had tended to repress crime and to form a nucleus round which had gathered schools, district visiting societies, provident associations, clothing clubs, and literary institutes; while every family of the flock had been enabled to find that which no civil institution, however perfect, could afford him, the care of the Chistian pastor, and the sympathy of a common friend. That was the view which he took of the parochial system; and to maintain such a system in the most complete efficiency, he believed that abundant means might be produced from the resources of the Church itself by wise and judicious management, without calling upon Parliament for any additional funds to aid in its maintenance. Now, the principal wants of the present day might, for convenience, be divided into three classes. First, those into which inquiry had already been made by the Commissioners of 1836, for relieving which, therefore, expectations had virtually been held out, but which expectations had not yet been realised; second, those where a partial effect had been produced, but where the evils arising from want of completion were very severe; and, thirdly, those into which inquiry had recently been instituted, but towards supplying which no steps had as yet been taken. With regard to the first class, he would, with the permission of the House, read an extract from the Commissioners' Report of 1836, which had long excited expectation:—
"It appears, from the Report of the Ecclesiastical Revenues Commission, that there are no less than 3,528 benefices under 1502. per annum. In every one of these benefices it is desirable that there should be a resident clergyman; but unless their value be augmented, it will in many cases be impossible to secure this advantage. The neces-
516
sity of such augmentation will be greatly increased by the changes which we are about to recommend in the laws relating to pluralities and residence. The means which can be applied to effect the improvement, are very far short of the amount required. Even were no addition made to the incomes of benefices having a population below 500, it would take no less a sum than 35,000 l. per annum to raise all benefices having a population between 500 and 2,000 to the annual value of 200 l., those having a population of 2,000 and upwards to 300 l., and those having 5,000 and upwards to 500 l. per annum. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners also reported that the benefices in public patronage were 1,533, and the sum required for their augmentation 145,195 l. The number augmented by the Commission was 796, at an annual charge of 44,728 l. The number still to he augmented was 737, and the remainder of the sum required was 100,467 l."
It also appeared from their Report that the number of livings in public patronage was 1,533, requiring an annual sum for their augmentation of 145,195 l. per annum. He would, therefore, take those, as, being in public patronage, they might appear to have most claim upon public funds, and he found that the number of these livings augmented by the Commissioners amounted to 796, at an annual charge of about 44,728 l.; leaving to be yet augmented, 737; and a remaining portion of the sum originally considered necessary amounting to 100,467 l. per annum. And when they considered that these wants had been thus deliberately set forth, he thought it was but fair to say that a virtual promise had been given for the remainder of that sum. With regard to that class of cases where partial effects had been produced, but where evils still arose from a want of the system having been thoroughly and completely carried out, he ought perhaps to include under them a great deal that had been done since the year 1818 by the formation of new districts and parishes; and by the Acts then and subsequently passed, separate and distinct parishes might be formed where part of the original endowment was divided, and separation from the mother parish was complete; district parishes might be formed, where no part was taken from the endowment of the original parish, and which were still in a degree subordinate to the mother parish; and district and consolidated chapelries might be formed, which by recent legislation occupied a position with regard to the mother parish nearly similar with that of district parishes; and to these might be added those parishes formed under the 6 & 7 Vict., commonly called Sir Robert Peel's parishes.
Now great as had been the good which

517
had been effected by these measures in the inculcation and spread of Divine truth, these districts still did form a subject of complaint, which in bringing forward a measure of this nature, having for its object the creation of a large surplus revenue, addressed itself especially to their notice. And here he must recall the attention of the House to that petition which he had that day presented, signed by upwards of 800 incumbents: from this it appeared that it was the opinion of those whose duties led them into a practical consideration of the position of these districts, that the law as it now stood was unable to provide for the completion of the parochial system, by their erection into separate and independent parishes, and that this inability arose mainly from the want of an adequate and fixed endowment. There were other evils also which flowed from this, and were scarcely inferior to it; he alluded to the anomalous position which was occupied by the incumbents of these churches, who were unable in some cases to perform some of the sacred offices of religion for their congregations, but as the law now stood might be called upon to admit for that purpose, cither the incumbent of the mother church, or one of his curates into their churches. The collection, too, of church rates for the mother church over the entire original parish, was an evil for which as yet the law had provided no remedy; in many cases it led to the refusal to pay them altogether, or, if paid, it robbed the district church of that legitimate support which it had a right to expect from its own congregation. The incumbents of these districts complained bitterly, that the tendency of the law, as it now stood, was to nullify that pastoral connexion which ought to subsist between a minister and his congregation. But one of the greatest evils, and that to which he would now especially call the attention of the House, was that which proceeded from the want of a permanent and adequate endowment. The petitioners stated—
"That those benefices which have of late years come into existence under the Church Building Acts, or by the operation of other causes, being for the most part inadequately endowed, having, in numerous cases, no more than the lowest legal endowment of 13 l. annually, and in some no endowment at all, and being almost universally situated in the poorest localities, the incumbents are compelled to wander beyond their assigned districts, in pastoral visitation, after pew-renters resident in other parishes, who naturally expect and require a share of their time and attention. Hence it results that the churches professedly
518
built for the accommodation of the inhabitants of the districts are often practically closed against the great mass of the population for whom they were intended, and that the attention of the clergy is necessarily diverted from their appropriate duties within their districts by the claims of non resident pew-renters. That the extension of the parochial system, with an adequate endowment, to the districts already existing or hereafter to be constituted, would effectually remedy these evils, by throwing open the church to all parishioners, by exonerating the incumbent from all pastoral duties beyond the boundaries of his parish, and thus leaving him at liberty to concentrate his energies to his legal charge. That your petitioners would humbly represent to your hon. House that there are nearly 4,000 incumbents whose incomes do not amount to 150 l., and very many incumbents of long standing in the ministry, and of exemplary and laborious lives, whose incomes are below 90 l. annually. That, in consequence, many of your petitioners and other clergymen are obliged to engage in tuition—in writing for journals and periodicals—in labouring for religious societies— and in holding lectureships in other and distant parishes—in order to obtain food and raiment for themselves and families. That at the same time the claims for relief which are in all places made on the clergy are, in the case of your petitioners, considerably increased by the position of their incumbencies. That very many of the churches in the poor localities are gradually falling into decay for want of timely repairs; that considerable expenditure is also required in very many cases for the suitable conducting of Divine service, and for other purposes; and that there is a general feeling of objection to contribute to the expenses of the district church, on the ground that the inhabitants are already taxed for the support of the mother church."
He would also mention some other of the anomalies of the present system, which frequently interfered to prevent the minister from performing his sacred duty; and oftentimes wholly impeded the collection of church rates throughout a district, and, as a consequence, deprived the Church of its legitimate source of income. They also tended to nullify that pastoral connexion which ought to subsist between the minister and his congregation. But the most serious evil of all was that to which they must now especially attend—that which proceeded from the want of an adequate endowment for the poorer clergy. Some of the correspondence that had taken place on this subject, showed the great necessities of the clergymen who laboured in those poor and populous parishes. He would read one or two of these statements to the House. The first stated:—
"I have a widely-scattered population of 700, necessitating a horse to visit the sick. There is no place nearer than two miles where we can obtain the necessaries of life. The endowment of my church is 36 l. 5s. 4d. per annum. The pew rents need the assistance of a sermon yearly to

519
meet the incidental expenses. The rector of the parent church has hitherto given me 55 l. 15 s. 8d. per annum, and I believe will continue to do so; still he is under no legal obligation to do so, and it is far from agreeable that the incumbent should feel thus under obligation to the rector of the parent living, and so be scarcely independent, though nominally the minister of an independent charge. These statements are, I think, a fair sample of many, very many, of the district churches."
The second was to the same effect:—
"I am a perpetual curate of one of the churches under Sir Robert Peel's Act, with an endowment of 150 l. a year. The parties who built the church offered it to me on condition of receiving from me 700 l. towards the building, & c. They gave mo to understand that I should have the pew rents in addition to the 150 l. On that condition I accepted their offer. In the course of a few years, however, it was discovered that I had no legal right to pew rents at all in a church built under that Act; and it is because the leading persons in my congregation would not break faith with me that I have not long ago been deprived of every fraction of income arising from that source. We have no church rates, and yet we are obliged to pay church rates to the old parish. If I had only the 150 l. for my income, then, after paying all ex-penses—organist, clerk, cleaning, lighting, & c. —I should probably receive nothing at all, and my 700 l. would go in the bargain. lit appears to me, then, that churches built under Sir Robert Peel's Act, since they are limited to a fixed income, with no means, except the repairing fund, to pay all necessary expenses, are in many respects actually worse off than district churches with legal pew rents."
In some parts it was so difficult to procure persons to undertake the duty, that it became necessary to make a rule to accept the first application which might be made. The system of providing for the maintenance of the minister by pew rents, was one totally opposed to the theory of our Church, which was one founded upon an endowed and not upon a voluntary principle. Some of the evils of the system had already been described in the correspondence he had read. To these he might add, that there were cases where the richer part of the population were removing their residences from those places where the church was first built, to the outskirts of the town; but as the income of the minister was still dependent upon pew rents, the church remained practically closed against the poor population, who were living immediately around it. In other cases, a preacher of some popularity in the pulpit, drew from a neighbouring district the richer, leaving to his brother incumbent but the poorer and more indigent parts of the congregation, and who were generally the occupiers of
520
free seats. In every case the present system had a tendency to limit and control that personal discretion and liberty on the part of the minister of a congregation which he was entitled by his high functions to exercise in matters relating to the arrangement of the spiritual concerns and wants of that parish with which he might be connected. He would state to the House his impression, that to provide for the ministration of the Gospel by means of payment from an unfixed and uncertain source, was at direct variance with the principles of the Established Church. It was a system which the principle of the Church providing for the religious instruction of the people by endowment directly negatived, and one which the Statute Law condemned. He would just read to the House the preamble of the Act constituting the Bounty Board, though he was far from saying that in all respects it was applicable to the present day:—
"Whereas a sufficient provision for the clergy had not yet been made, by reason whereof divers men and stipendiary curates are depending for their necessary maintenance on the good will of their flock—that they are consequently under great temptation of suiting their doctrines to the humours of those who contributed to their maintenance, thereby giving occasion to great faction and schism, and generating contempt for the minister,"
To remedy these evils, fixed and permanent endowments were required, and were these provided, the erection of all these districts into separate and independent parishes, would be a step, not only against which no good grounds of objection could be laid, but to which every reasonable consideration then would point. The districts formed under the 6 & 7 Vict., also formed a ground for serious complaint. In these no pew rents were permitted to be taken; their endowment was only 150 l, per annum; and thus these ministers were occupied, in addition to their parochial duties, in writing letters and endeavouring to obtain subscriptions for the erection of a church; and unless a gentleman so situated possessed some little property of his own, it was impossible for him to present a respectable appearance before his congregation. Truly he was justified in saying, that these places also required an increase of endowment. With regard to the third class to which he had referred— namely, that class concerning which inquiries had been made, but for whose benefit no funds had been provided. It would be found from a return which had been

521
laid upon the table of the labours of the Commission which had been issued to take into consideration the question of the subdivision of parishes, that for places having a population of more than 3,000, there was need of no less than 580 new churches, and that the erection of those churches would necessarily involve a new division of districts; and if sufficient funds could be collected to enable a prospect to be held out that these districts would be permanently endowed, that would be a great inducement to the public to come forward and give subscriptions for the erection of new churches. A striking illustration of what might be done by means of public funds judiciously applied, would be shown by the statement he was about to make in respect to what had been done in the field of education. The total sum granted by Parliament from 1845 to 1850 for Church of England schools was 327,230 l., and the sum that was raised by private contributions to meet this was 399,819 l. They might, therefore, form a reasonable conclusion, that if there were a proper administration of the property of the Church, there would be provided not only an adequate endowment for ministers, but also a sum sufficient for the erection of those churches. Then, with regard to those classes of wants which he had detailed to the House, he found that the number of churches built under the Church Building Acts was 857. The number of districts that were formed by the 6 & 7 Vict. was 233, and the number of churches that were still required, according to the recent inquiry, was 580—total 1,670. To endow each of those with 150 l. a year, would require about251,000 l. To this he would add the sum of 100,467 l. which was virtually promised by the Commissioners of 1836; and the sum would in the whole amount to about 351,000 l. per annum. Such was the state of the ease as it now stood, and such were the requirements to supply the pressing spiritual wants of a portion of the people, which addressed' themselves to public notice, and which it would be wrong not to take some steps to remedy. Having now stated those wants, he would endeavour to show how far, from the condition and extent of the Church property, those wants might be supplied if the property were under a wise administration. The first Returns to which he had access were made in 1836; and by those Returns, calculating that the sums received upon the average of three years at 25 per cent of the entire annual value of the property, it
522
appeared that the entire annual value of capitular property held under lease would, according to this calculation, amount to 661,435 l, per annum; and the value of the property from other sources amounted to 112,830 l. per annum. The value of episcopal property under lease was 300,260 l. per annum, and the amount from other sources was 107,097 l., making the value of the total amount of property under lease 961,695 l., and of property from other sources 219,927 l. Now by the process of enfranchisement of some portions of church property, and the buying of the leasehold interest of others, he was informed, on the best authority, that taking one description of property with another, the effect was, that about one-half of the fee was actually parted with, while the remainder was brought into hand; the sum, therefore, with which they had to deal would be one-half of the entire annual value of property held under lease; to which, if were added that of property derived from other sources, we should have an annual sum of 700,775 l. as that which by this calculation would be available for Church purposes. Now, in forming an estimate of the sum which would be necessary to provide for the incomes of all Church dignitaries, together with the expenses of the establishments, it was true that they could only as yet arrive at an approximation; but when they considered what had been the tendency of all past legislation on this subject, they would not be far from forming a just conclusion. All past legislation had tended to fix and limit the incomes of dignitaries; already those of the bishops were now or prospectively so fixed, as were also those of the members of four of the princi. pal chapters; and with respect to the others, though not in every case acted upon, Parliament had already made recommendations for regulating their incomes, recommending for deans, 1,000 l. per annum, and for canons, 500 l.; it was also exceedingly improbable that the Commission which was now sitting would conclude its labours without recommending in future fixed instead of fluctuating incomes for the members of the chapters; and, therefore, taking, with the exception of those whose incomes had been already fixed by Parliament, 1,000 l. as the average incomes of cleans, and 600 l. as that of canons, and taking the expenses of the Cathedral establishments upon a general average of the sums returned for those expenses in the year 1836, the total an-

523
nual charge that would be required to defray the incomes of Church dignitaries, would be—

Archbishops and Bishops

£152,200

Deans

36,000

Canons

89,800

Minor Canons (150 l.)

31,750

Cathedral expenses on returned average

54,000

£363,750

Leaving a surplus in due course of time, of 337,026 l. applicable to parochial purposes. There was, however, every reason to believe that the estimate of the value of the property was considerably greater since the commutation of tithes; in the chapters of York, Chester, Bristol, St. Asaph, Rochester, St. Davids, & c, the value of tithes alone, as returned by the Commissioners, equalled the entire annual value of the property under lease as given by the returns. It was given in evidence before a Committee of the other House that the value of the lands of the see of York was 20,000 l. per annum, and that of tithes 27,000 l., making a gross value of 47,000 l.; whereas the return made under former calculations was only 37,000 l. The value of the property of the see of Durham as given in evidence was 100,000 l. per annum, whereas the value of it given from the Returns in 1836 was only 48,000 l. In 1843 a Return was made to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners of the entire value of the property of the see of Gloucester. It appeared, according to the evidence, that the sums received upon the renewal of leases on the septennial value were exactly one-sixth of the entire annual value; and the same result appeared upon comparing the annual value of properties held under lives under the see of Ely, with the sums received upon renewals of leases of that description; and further, by applying the results of this calculation to last septennial returns from the various sees, and to those sees, of the value of whose property, evidence had already been given before the Lords Committee, the result so nearly coincided as to leave little doubt that the calculation was a correct one. Assuming then that the sums derived from fines upon renewals, were one-sixth of the entire annual value, the entire annual value of episcopal leasehold property would be 547,094 l. With regard to capitular property, he had gone no further than to assume that the sums obtained were one-fifth instead of one-sixth; and in this calculation the entire annual value of capit-
524
ular property would be 826,792 l., making a gross total of 1,373,886 l., one-half of which added to 246,797 l., the annual value of episcopal and capitular property other than leasehold, gave a sum as being available for church purposes of 933,740 l., and left an available surplus of 569,990 l.; while the sum for which there was an immediate and pressing need, was 350,000 l. Prom these calculations he was led to believe that, with this property, under a wise system of administration, it would not only be possible to provide for the present spiritual requirements of the country, but even to provide for an increased population, so that at no time an appeal would be made in vain to the resources of the Establishment. He would not detain the House much longer, but would now shortly detail the provisions of the measure which he wished to introduce. It was simply to transfer the management of the episcopal and capitular property to Estate Commmissioners, investing them with legal control for the purposes of management only, and empowering them to receive all the rents and profits, except such as were derived from land analogous to glebe land, and sums derived from money invested in any public security. He was anxious that the measure he proposed should come into operation with as little sudden change as was compatible with so important a step, and the Bill therefore did not interfere in any way with the fee of the property, or tend in the smallest manner to jeopardise its tenure, or to alienate it from those corporations in whom it was now vested. On the contrary, the measure provided that a separate account should be kept of the properties of each individual corporation, to which the parties should have access by themselves or agents, and that a seal should be used, with a distinctive die for each corporation. With respect to the transfer of property, the Bill would not interfere with the Act of enfranchisement of 1851; but it would provide that the power given by the former Act to the different ecclesiastical corporations should be transferred directly to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, in order that the process of his measure might not he interfered with, and also that the estates assigned to each see would be sufficient to yield its annual income. The Bill also provided that the sum which was necessary to make up the income of the bishop or chaplain, should be, of course, a rentcharge on the property; and in the event of this sum not being paid within

525
a certain time to be fixed, there would be given immediate powers of pe-entry. It would be in the recollection of the House that some of the sees were already in possession of fixed incomes, namely, those whose bishops were appointed since 1848. He proposed, in regard to those and all capitular estates, together with that of the other bishops who had already agreed with the Commissioners for fixed incomes, that they should immediately come under the operation of the Bill. In regard to those other sees appointed prior to 1848, it was proposed that the operation of the Bill should be delayed until after the next avoidance of the see. With regard to incomes, the Bill provided that a half-yearly return should be made to the Commissioners of all the sums derived from property, except such as were obtained from sources of income not under the control of the Commissioners. The salary for the dignitary would, of course, be the first rentcharge of the see or chapter. With regard to some chapters that had no fixed incomes, the Bill provided that such sums should be paid to them by the Commissioners as they should in any case be entitled to receive. It also provided that so long as the major part of the canons were not in possession of fixed incomes, they should receive from the Commissioners the sums necessary for the expenses of the cathedral without any inquiry; but after the majority of the canons were in possession of fixed incomes they should not be paid without the consent of the Commissioners, unless they were expressly mentioned in the Cathedral Statutes. The Bill contained one other provision, of the effect of which, however, he had taken no account, in the estimate he had laid before the House of the value of church property, but which, if adopted, would have the effect of materially enhancing that value. He proposed that the practice now adopted by the Commissioners, of not renewing the leases of any tithes, should be extended to all the episcopal and capitular property, as it came under their management; and that upon either the expiration or surrender, upon purchase, of the lease of any tithes, a proper provision should be made by them for the wants of those places where the tithes arose, and that the remainder of the tithes should afterwards be assigned to, and form part of, the endowment of the particular see or chapter to which they might belong.
In conclusion, he had only to thank the
526
House for the attention they had given him in making these proposals. To conclude, from what he had stated that some such measure as that which he had now the honour of submitting, was the legitimate and necessary consequence of all previous legislation, appeared to him hut a fair and rational deduction. He had shown the present relation to the Commissioners of the property in question, and the large share of it to which they were already entitled, over which, however, they exercised little or no control. The present relation of the bishops to the Commission was very unsatisfactory; in order that they might be in possession of that income which had been assigned to them by Parliament, they had to make a half-yearly return of the proceeds of their property, and as much as it fell short of their stipulated income, they received— from where? From the common fund of the Commissioners, while the surplus, where it existed, was paid over; a surplus which the Commissioners might just as well have been at the pains of managing and securing on their own behalf. And yet they were told, that to make the bishops recipients of an income from the Commissioners, was to place them in a humiliating and stipendiary position. On the other hand, he proposed that in every case it was their own property which should yield them the income to be enjoyed; that the bishops should have power to inspect at all times the accounts, and that those accounts should be kept distinct from all other accounts, and that the strictest precautions should be adopted of which the law was capable to secure a prompt and accurate payment. He had also called the attention of the House to the fact that the property had been brought to some extent under a new tenure, and that a system of enfranchisement had been adopted, which could not but in time become general, and this tenure involved a totally new relationship of the bishop to his estates—one hitherto untried in this country, and equally at variance with the increasing responsibility of his other occupations. In addition to this, there were wants from which the most serious evils might flow, which would he left unremedied unless a large surplus were provided; and he would ask, was that surplus more likely to accure from a responsible and concentrated management than from a variety of quarters, each having their separate agencies?

527
Again, did they wish to confer in time a real efficiency upon the Church Building Acts. It could only be done, he thought he might assert, by holding out a prospect both to parishes and districts which those Acts were not able to afford—of a fixed and somewhat adequate endowment. Was the 14 & 15 Vict, to confer a real boon upon the Church by enhancing the value of its property? Such a value, it was true, might be conferred; but without a mode of administration suited to a new description of tenure, they might do little to promote the true interests of the Church, but encounter, perhaps; a new and a more formidable danger. And lastly, was population increasing; were a thousand forms of evil and ignorance threatening our social state; and were numbers of our fellow-countrymen still plunged in the grossest darkness, without either the will or the power to move towards their own relief? On them was laid the heavy responsibility, not only to frame enactments to repress their crime, provision to ameliorate their temporal condition and cheer their homes, but also, of regarding them as those whose understandings had been given them from above, and whose spirits had been formed in a mould measuring time and reaching into eternity. It was with these feelings that he asked the House to enter upon the consideration of this measure, and while the Legislature of later days had proclaimed its wisdom, by securing all individuals freedom of religious convictions, he would ask it, at the same time, to emulate the Christian fervour of a remoter period, in an active solicitude for the well-being of the Established Church—to vindicate, by the discussion of these questions, its long-established rights over all persons and things, ecclesiastical as well as civil; and, lastly, to discharge its alienable duties as the Parliament of a country still blessed with a union of Church and State, by enabling that Church widely to make known those truths which her Master purchased with his life, and which our ancestors strove for and secured. And could he better conclude those remarks, at a time, too, when events were daily proclaiming, in louder notes, that the period might arrive when they must rely not only on a human arm, but on the Divine protection for the inviolability of our shores, than by quoting to the House the words of one whose heart was warmed under the sense of an act of royal bounty to the Church—words which they could not doubt, it would glad-
528
den thousands in this country, could they appropriately form a page in the history of our own Most Gracious Sovereign:—
"This was to put to silence that insult of the common enemy, who abroad and at home upbraided us with the poverty and contempt of the English clergy, and this was to rebuke the spirit of profaneness which delighted in the same objection; and therefore Her Majesty prepared to consecrate the only ecclesiastical branch of her revenues to these pious uses—for God and His Church and Ministers; that so she might accomplish the wishes and desires of her Royal predecessors, and finish the good work that had been often recommended: that beyond any precedent in former reigns she might honour God, and promote His public worship, and countenance and confirm religion by repairing the supports of it: that she might vindicate the ministerial office, and restore the decent respects due unto that holy character: that she might extend her charity to the souls of all her people, by better exciting and rewarding the pastoral care of them: in a words, that she might bless the present age, and transmit that blessing to posterity."
The noble Lord concluded by moving for leave to bring in the Bill.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make better provision for the management of Episcopal and Capitular Property."
LORD JOHN RUSSELLsaid, the noble Marquess had devoted a great deal of labour to this subject, and he believed that the noble Marquess was animated by a very great regard for the good of the Church, and the spiritual welfare of her people. With respect to the particular purpose of the noble Marquess, and the details of his Bill, he (Lord John Russell) thought it was far better that the House should assent to the Bill being brought in, and that they should thus have a full opportunity of considering its details, than that they should then enter into any discussion of the statement which the noble Marquess had made. It was evident that many of the propositions of the Bill were of great importance, and that there were some to which objections might be made. He quite agreed with the noble Marquess that the House should not consider the Acts which had been passed from 1836 to the present time as forming a complete system, but that they should from time to time remove the objections, and extend the benefits of those Acts. With those few words he heartily concurred in the Motion for leave to introduce the Bill; and he trusted the noble Marquess would not unduly press a measure of such importance at a period of the Session when

529
Parliament might not be able to give to it that attention which it deserved.
MR. HUMEsaid, he begged to express his satisfaction at the Bill itself, but he did not agree with all the principles laid down by the noble Marquess. He did not think that that House should assent to the payment of any more of the public money for the building of churches. He regretted that he did not hear the noble Marquess allude to the necessity of educating the humbler classes. Neither had he alluded to a point which also was of great importance. The noble Marquess seemed to think that Church property could only be applied to one sect. He should, however, recollect that when the Church property was first bestowed for religious purposes, it was intended to educate all the people. Since then one-half of the people had left the Church; and the question naturally arose whether one-half of the money taken from this religion might not be applied to the purpose of giving a good secular education to the people. He did not agree with the noble Marquess in all his propositions; but he thought he was, nevertheless, entitled to very great credit. The noble Marquess had shown, by his statements, that he well understood the subject; and he (Mr. Hume) was perfectly satisfied that, as the result of his efforts, a great and an important service would be done.
MR. HEADLAMsaid, he willingly gave his cordial concurrence in the objects which the noble Marquess had in view; and he was of opinion that the Bill he proposed to introduce would effect a real and practicable improvement in the administration of Church property. But he had risen to point out some of the defects and anomalies of recent legislation in diverting the funds belonging to the Church in one district, from being applied to the wants of the Church in that district, and making them applicable to the country at large. In the diocese of Durham there were large funds applicable to the Church, and great necessities on the part of the people; but it was proposed to distribute them, not in the locality, but in the country at large. In Newcastle and Gateshead, both very large towns, this was peculiarly the case-Gateshead contained 113,000 inhabitants, yet there were really less funds applicable to the spiritual wants of the population than in many other places where there was not so large an aggregate of human beings; whilst in Newcastle the inhabitants
530
had been obliged to subscribe funds amongst themselves for the maintenance of the vicar. These things were objectionable; and whilst such wants existed, the inhabitants thought it rather unjust that the funds belonging to the district should be applied to other places, which had no such prior claim. The population of the county of Durham had increased more rapidly than that of any other county in England; with the exception of Lancashire and another county, arising in a great measure from the opening of the great coal field. With so great an increase to the numbers of the people, there must necessarily be a large demand for their spiritual provision; and certainly in many parts of the county there were most important wants of this description. But the inhabitants had been deprived by recent legislation of those means which were furnished by their own locality; and his object in now rising was to state that when the Bill was discussed in Committee, he should bring forward a clause giving these poorer districts a prior claim upon the funds which were now applied generally.
SIR BENJAMIN HALLcongratulated the Church on the progress which reform was making in reference to abuses of which he had long complained. He was aware that those who took an active part some years ago in bringing these questions forward were subjected to much obloquy and opprobrium; but he, for his part, was always determined to persevere until he could bring the matter so prominently before the public mind that he might be quite sure it would be impossible to go on without the correction of those vast abuses in the distribution of the temporalities of the Church which had been a source of the deepest regret to all friends of the Establishment. He did not expect, however, that in the course of three or four years he should see the House of Commons acquiescing in the proposition of his noble Friend (the Marquess of Blandford), and permitting him to bring in a Bill which certainly wont further than any proposition he (Sir B. Hall) had ever ventured to make in that House. He congratulated his noble Friend on the success which had thus far attended his praiseworthy endeavours; and as it seemed to be the wish of the noble Lord the leader of that House (Lord J. Russell), and of the House generally, that no discussion should take place upon the proposition made by his noble Friend, he should bow at once to that wish. Nor was it necessary

531
to enter largely into the subject, because there appeared to be a unanimous feeling that the measure should go forward and be discussed on its second reading, should opposition arise at that stage. With regard to what had fallen from the hon. Member who spoke last, if it were proposed by his noble Friend the Marquess of Blandford that the revenues of the Church should be made available for the Church generally, instead of being confined to particular localities, he (Sir B. Hall) would give such a proposition his cordial and hearty support. His ground for saying so was, that our Church ought to be viewed generally, and not partially, as regarded localities; and if there were any one portion of the country more richly endowed than another, and if it could be shown that there were a greater amount of Church property in the diocese of Durham than was absolutely necessary for the spiritual wants of the community there, he thought it would be advisable that the benefits which might arise from the distribution of that property should be felt by the poorer districts of the empire, rather than be confined to one extremely wealthy locality, so far as Church property was concerned. If the hon. Member (Mr. Headlam) would accompany him (Sir B. Hall) to some of the districts of Wales, he would there see what real poverty amongst the working classes meant, and his sympathies would be excited by the narratives he might hear of the manner in which these poor hardworking ministers of our Church were compelled to live. If, then, he could see any way of making the superfluous revenues of the diocese of Durham available for the wants of the poorer districts in any part of the empire, such a proposition should have his support. In conclusion, he begged to thank his noble Friend for the pains he had taken in reference to this subject; and he sincerely hoped before the Session was over that the Bill of his noble Friend, either as it stood at present, or at all events in all its material features, might be passed into a law; because he was satisfied that by such a proposition our Church would be more beloved, more respected, more cared for, and rendered more beneficial to the community at large.
MR. EWARTsaid, he must express his concurrence in the approbation which had been bestowed on the Motion of the noble Marquess, and as a Churchman begged to thank him for his exertions and services. He hoped to see such changes
532
introduced as would render the Church more efficient; and he would remind the House that the poorer clergy had often contributed more to the schools in their districts than the richest landowners around them. He trusted that the anomaly of some of the canons in certain capitular bodies receiving more than the deans who were over them, would be removed, and that the inequality between the classes of "new" and of "old" deans would be removed.
MR. FERGUSONsaid, he had been requested by a large number of the working clergy to convey their complaints to that House, and to state that they could not maintain themselves as they ought to do on the pittance allowed to them. The inequality of the revenues received by the different classes of the clergy operated much against the Church, and injured the rich even more than the poorer clergy, for it tended to make them care more for the things of this world than they should. Within the last few years a great change had come over the spirit of the Church. She had shaken off her coldness and apathy, and that change was entirely owing to the working clergy, who were the real successors of the Apostles, and who did the work of the Apostles, devoting themselves heart and soul to their sacred calling. He believed there was sufficient property possessed by the Church for the maintenance of all her ministers, if it was properly divided; and he thanked the noble Marquess most sincerely for his efforts to effect that object, and hoped he would meet with that success which his efforts so well deserved.
MR. APSLEY PBLLATTsaid, it afforded him much pleasure in concurring in the tribute of praise which had been so deservedly bestowed on the noble Marquess for having introduced this Bill. He sympathised with the distresses of the working clergy of the Church of England, but, at the same time, there were clergymen in the enjoyment of large incomes for which they did little in return. He thought there ought to be a most searching inquiry into those incomes, and into the management of Church property. As a Nonconformist, he thought he was entitled to claim a part of the merit for the Nonconformist clergy in helping to bring about the improved state of things which the noble Marquess referred to.
MR. J. PHILLIMOREsaid, that pluralities were rapidly disappearing, and by

533
the existing laws it was impossible they could be renewed.
The MARQUESS of BLANDFORDsaid, he begged to tender his thanks to the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) for the manner in which he had received the Bill. It was, indeed, matter for congratulation that a measure of this nature should be allowed by the Government to be laid on the table of the House, and to go to a first reading; and he quite agreed with his hon. Friend (Sir B. Hall) that it was a sign of very great advance—an advance which, he trusted, whilst we experienced its benefits, would, as far as he (the Marquess of Blandford) was concerned, be tempered with that moderation which would forbid departure from the principles of the constitution. He would not detain the House further than to say, that, whatever time or labour he had bestowed upon this measure, he had been abundantly repaid for it by the cordial manner in which the measure had been received, and which would be an ample encouragement to him to proceed with it to the end.
Leave given.
Bill ordered to be brought in by the Marquess of Blandford and Captain Kings-cote.

LIVERPOOL ELECTION COMMITTEE.
MR. INGHAMbrought up the Report of the Select Committee.
House informed, that the Committee had determined—
"That Charles Turner and William Forbes Mackenzie, esquires, were not duly elected Burgesses to serve in this present Parliament for the Borough of Liverpool.
"That the last Election for the said Borough is a void Election."
And the said Determinations were ordered to be entered in the Journals of this House.

THE SEPTENNIAL ACT.
MR. SPEAKERhaving called upon Lord Dudley Stuart, who had a Motion on the paper for to-night for the repeal of the Septennial Act,
MR. HUMErose, and said, he would put it to his noble Friend whether in the then state of the House, looking at the prospect before them, and considering that during the late discussion on the ballot there seemed to be a general wish that as the Government had undertaken to bring in a measure of Parliamentary reform next Session, the time of the House should not
534
be occupied by collateral questions—knowing also how late the House sat last night —whether it was not advisable to withdraw the Motion, and not raise a debate on the present occasion.
LORD DUDLEY STUARTsaid, he was very reluctant to defer a Motion of such great importance as that of which he had given notice; at the same time he was desirous of attaching every weight to the opinion of that old, tried, and steady reformer, his hon. Friend the Member for Montrose. He was quite sensible that at any time he laboured under great disadvantage in proposing this Motion, and especially so on the present occasion, in consequence of the thin state of the House, which had been produced by peculiar circumstances. It was unfortunate for him that his Motion was called upon at precisely the most critical hour in the day— [it was now half-past seven o'clock] —and it might possibly lead to the proceeding at which his hon. Friend had hinted, and which might, in all probability, prove fatal to his Motion. Under these circumstances, without pledging himself not to bring forward the question on some future day, he was quite willing to bow to the judgment of his hon. Friend, and to what appeared to be the desire of the House.
Motion withdrawn.
Notice taken that Forty Members were not present. House counted; and Forty Members not being present, the House was adjourned at Eight o'clock.

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Colonial Bishops Act Extension; Public Works Loan.
2a Income Tax; Incumbered Estates (Ireland) Act Continuance.

LAW OF REAL PROPERTY.
LORD LYNDHURSTwished to call the attention of the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack to a passage in the report of the Commissioners appointed to consider the subject of the Registration of Assurances and transfer of real property, in which they said that a mere measure of registration would not remove the difficulty arising from the complexity of our interests in land, and the subtleties of law which embarrassed instead of protecting them—and expressed an opinion that these inconveniences could only be done away with by the simplification of the law of real property, having reference to the system of registration which might be adopted. He had read this passage for the purpose of introducing a question he wished to put to his noble and learned Friend—whether he had in preparation or in contemplation any measure directed to the object? It was one of the most important objects connected with the amendment of the law. Most extensive interests were dependent upon it. He had lately held communication with many gentlemen of high eminence in the profession of the law on the other side of the Atlantic, and particularly with gentlemen connected with the State of Massachusetts. In the State of Massachusetts, the law of real property was in substance the same as in this country; but there had been a system of registration for 200 years, and the result had been that transfers of landed property were effected without difficulty and with small expense. He did not mean to say that, in the situation of this country, it was possible to expect to be able to simplify our proceedings to such an extent, but we might make advances towards it; and he trusted that his noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor would follow up his Bill for the registration of assurances by some measure calculated to improve the law of real property—a subject of the more importance at the present period, seeing that a Bill to impose duties on succession to landed property was at present before Parliament.
The LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he was perfectly aware that the Commissioners

475
who had recommended registration had coupled it with the statement to which his noble and learned Friend had alluded, and in which he himself entirely concurred. He had always been of opinion that a system of registration was the foundation certainly, but only the foundation, for any real improvement in the method of the transfer of real property. That had always been his opinion, and he was happy to have it confirmed by that of the learned Commissioners to whom he had alluded. But when his noble and learned Friend asked him if he had any such plan in progress or preparation, he was hound to tell him that he had no such plan—and for several reasons. In the first place, as was remarked in their Report itself, admitting all the objections that existed against the present system, until it should be known what our system of registration was to be, it was exceedingly difficult to say what the amendment of the law ought to be or could be. He believed that when a system of registration had been long in operation very little amendment would be necessary; for nine-tenths of the difficulties experienced originated from never being able to tell what the title was to the property which was to he transferred. Any system of registration must be of incalculable advantage, and it did not at all surprise him that the system which had been in operation in Massachusetts ever since the colony was planted, should have borne good fruits, and that in that State the transfer of property should be as easy as could well be imagined. He was not sanguine enough to suppose that with the complicated settlements we had in this country, the transfer of landed property could be as much simplified as it had been in America, but that it could be immensely simplified there was no reason to doubt. He had only to say that the moment the Bill now before the other House was passed, he should give his anxious attention to the improvement of the laws concerning real property, and he felt very confident that great improvements in them might be made.
LORD LYNDHURSTobserved that this question had been twofold—whether any measure of the kind he described was in preparation, or, if not prepared, in contemplation? The answer returned by his noble and learned Friend under the latter head was entirely satisfactory.
The LORD CHANCELLORmight be allowed to say that, though there was no
476
measure in actual preparation, he had had numerous conversations with many learned persons, in order to ascertain what might be done on the subject; but he did not like without further ground than this to say than any measure was in contemplation.
LORD BROUGHAMwas exceedingly glad that his noble and learned Friend above him should have put this question, and also that he should have received so satisfactory an answer from his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack—that was, as satisfactory as in the present stage of the question they could well expect. The remark made by both his noble and learned Friends was perfectly correct—that a mere registry would not cure the defects in our system of the transfer of landed property. The mere registration was only a part— a most necessary part no doubt—of that improvement of the law; but, if they were to stop there, unquestionably they would do only half, or less than half, their duty in that respect.

INCOME TAX BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
The EARL of ABERDEEN: My Lords, in moving the Second Reading of the Income Tax Bill, I may be permitted to place before your Lordships a general view of the objects entertained by Her Majesty's Government in making this proposition, and to point out the advantages which they expect the country to receive from its adoption. At the first formation of the Government, I stated to your Lordships that there would speedily be experienced great financial difficulties, or rather a financial crisis, by the failure of a large portion of our revenue, in consequence of the early cessation of the income tax; and I added that it would severely try the ingenuity and ability of the person who was in the position to be called upon to repair that breach. My Lords, the income tax having expired in the month of April, it became necessary for Her Majesty's Government to consider what course it was expedient to pursue. I believe it would have been found impossible to allow the income tax to expire without renewal, as it would have been impossible to find a substitute for that tax. The surplus at our disposal was insufficient to enable us to take this course, and the taxes necessary for the purpose of supplying the deficiency occasioned by the loss of the in-

477
come tax would have been so onerous, so oppressive, so unequal, that they would in fact have created more dissatisfaction, and have been more unpalatable to the people than the income tax itself. We therefore had no hesitation in deciding upon renewing the income tax. But then the question arose, in what manner, for what period, and with what modifications, should this be attempted. My Lords, it must be admitted that there is something in the nature of the income tax itself, notwithstanding the immense and incalculable advantages we have derived from it both in war and peace—there is something in its nature which is open to radical objections. There is no doubt but its inquisitorial nature is highly irksome and objectionable, and cannot be separated from it. It allows also the principle of self-assessment, which affords facilities, not to say encouragement, to fraud, very much to the loss of the revenue, and to the injury of morality:—that also is an objection which cannot be removed. It must also be admitted, that for some time past, and especially recently, a growing feeling has existed that the tax itself is unequal and unjust, from the mode in which it is imposed. It has been felt that to tax trades and professions the same as land—that to tax precarious incomes in the same manner as realised incomes, is in itself unjust; and this feeling has gradually extended so as to embrace the whole body of popular opinion, and it is demanded in every quarter, both by public men and in the press, that some change should take place by varying the rate of taxation according to the different sources of income—a principle, also, which received additional weight from having been adopted by Her Majesty's late Government, who announced, by their organ in the House of Commons, their intention to adopt it, although without explaining any special mode of carrying out this system—which, not explaining or announcing, they probably had not clearly in view. But, my Lords, I think, notwithstanding the prevalence of this conviction to which I have referred, and for which, I must admit, there is much foundation, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer so dealt with that notion in the speech with which he introduced his financial measures, that he absolutely silenced all opposition to his plan, which he proved to be the only one capable of being put into operation. I do not recollect, in the whole course of my life, any
478
instance in which the triumph of reason over strong conviction was more signally displayed than by my right hon. Friend. I do not say that he proved that the mode of assessing the tax adopted is just and equal; but he proved that any other mode is impossible, and that any attempt at another mode would be attended with still greater inequality and injustice. Now, my Lords, what is the inference to be drawn from this? What is the result to which we have come in consequence? Not that the income tax should not be renewed, but that it should not form any permanent portion of our financial system; and that, in renewing it, we should take care to secure means by which it should be extinguished in a given time—by which, in fact, I may say, it should expire of itself. My Lords, with this view we resolved upon the renewal of the tax. But to give the public confidence as to its cessation was most desirable. I fear that, from what we have seen—from what has already taken place— that if we had proposed to renew it for two or three years, with the declaration and intention that it should then expire—I fear that neither Parliament nor the country would have entertained much confidence in the cessation of the tax; and therefore it became necessary to give a proof of the sincerity of the Government in the manner in which they proposed the renewal of the tax, and to provide means which should obviously, at the given period, enable you, if you thought fit, to get rid of it without sacrifice and without loss. We therefore propose, my Lords, to re-enact it for two years more at the present rate of 7d. in the pound; for two years further at the rate of 6d. in the pound; and for three additional years at the rate of 5d. in the pound—by which arrangement the tax will terminate in the year 1860; and at that period we shall have provided a substitute for the tax, without any additional burden or sacrifice whatever. My Lords, I will not attempt, of course, to predict what may happen in the course of seven years; the events that are yet in the womb of time are beyond our foresight, and we can only form our plans according to the circumstances which may be anticipated in the ordinary course of affairs. I think, however, that in the descending rates of the tax we have given an intimation, a pledge, an evidence, of our sincere desire for the gradual reduction of the impost; and I shall state in a few moments the mode in

479
which at the period I have mentioned we shall have provided for its total extinction. Now, my Lords, in renewing the tax, we also propose to make large remissions of taxation, in such modes as shall be most beneficial to the trade and commerce of the people, and shall add most to their comfort and prosperity. In this we shall follow the policy and the example of the late Sir Robert Peel, from which the country has already derived such inestimable advantage, and from which, I trust, that it will derive still more. As the estimated surplus of the year amounts to no greater sum than 800,000 l., of course, to effect this object other sources must be sought, and I shall state to the House, in a few moments, how they are to be obtained. In the first place, we propose certain extensions of the income tax itself. It appears, I think, but reasonable that incomes below 150 l. should be charged with the tax. The possessors of incomes between 100 l. and 150 l. have derived great advantage from the remissions of taxation which took place in 1842 and 1845, and from the measures which have been adopted in consequence of the existence of an income tax; they will also derive great advantage from the remissions of taxation now about to be made; and it seems but reasonable, therefore, that they should be prepared to share in the burden of the income tax, which is now about to be modified. However, it is intended that incomes from 100 l. to 150 l. shall only be taxed at the rate of 5d. in the pound, so that incomes of 150 l. will pay 7d. for the first two years, 6d. for the next two years; whilst both they, and incomes down to 100 l. will pay 5d. for the remaining period of three years. The sum estimated to be obtained from this extension of the tax is 250,000 l. Then, my Lords, comes the extension of the income tax to Ireland. Now, my Lords, in principle it cannot be denied that there is no doubt that Ireland ought to be equally taxed with England. This principle was acknowledged by Sir Robert Peel in 1842, when he imposed the income tax, by the compensatory tax he proposed for Ireland —a duty on spirits of 1s. a gallon, and an increased stamp duty. It is true that the spirit duty was very speedily repealed, and some time afterwards a very large proportion of the stamp duty was also remitted. But the principle of equal taxation cannot possibly be controverted; and it is proposed now to extend the income tax to
480
Ireland—a measure by which it is expected that 450,000 l. will be obtained. This principle is, indeed, so just and obvious that I doubt very much whether the representatives of this part of the United Kingdom would have consented to the renewal of the tax at all without the extension that is proposed. But although Ireland has received the same advantage as the other parts of the kingdom have derived from the imposition of the income tax on England in 1842, and the measures of general relief passed in consequence, still the situation of that country, no doubt, requires consideration, and calls for large and liberal dealing. Although the distress under which that country has laboured with such severity has been mitigated, and indeed has ceased, still the effects of the calamity of 1847 remain to be alleviated and removed; and in imposing the income tax, it has been thought wise and just to make a great remission of the burdens now imposed upon Ireland. My Lords, the consolidated annuities represent a capital of 4,500,000 l., 1,500,000 l. of which may be said strictly to belong to the establishment for the relief of the poor; but the other 3,000,000 l. are more or less connected with the land. Now, my Lords, the Committee of your Lordships' House which sat upon this subject, I believe, recommended the remission of 2,000,000 l, of these consolidated annuities; but it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to propose the remission of the whole. This, my Lords, may be considered a boon which, I think, may fairly compensate for the imposition of the income tax, inasmuch as a large portion of those annuities, the capital of which represents an annual charge of 245,000 l.—three-fourths of them, I believe—would endure for forty years, whereas the income tax will expire in seven years. The condition of Ireland, of course, varies in different parts of the country, and, therefore, those remissions of burdens, however desirable, and however fair on the whole, operate unequally in different parts. There is no reason, perhaps, why Belfast should not pay an income tax just as well as Glasgow or Liverpool; whilst, on the other hand, the western provinces are utterly unable to discharge their existing obligations. But although the remission may be more welcome and more sensibly felt in one part of the country than another, still the remission of the whole amount appeared to be the most just and equitable mode

481
of proceeding. I will now state to your Lordships the whole remission of taxation which it is intended to make, by means of which a permanent income will be secured, and from which we anticipate the extinction of the income tax. From 1853 to 1860, the period at which the income tax will expire, the remission will take place, and the gross loss to the revenue in the present year, arising from this remission, will be 165,000 l. I will state the amount for the whole period, in order that persons may be enabled to contrast the income tax as it will exist at the end of this period, with the amount of permanent taxation we shall have realised in order to extinguish it. The remission of the soap duties will be 1,126,000 l.; stamp duties, 420,000 l.; assessed taxes, 290,000 l.; post horses, 54,000 l.: reduction of colonial postage, 40,000 l. Then, as regards the Customs —tea duties, 3,000,000 l.; minor duties, 123,000 l.; and from other sources, 262,000 l. In short, we calculate that the whole amount of remitted taxation during this period will amount to 5,315,000 l. Now we calculate, according to the example of former experience, that this amount of remitted taxation, large as it is, will recover itself in the course of this period of seven years, just as the remissions of taxation in 1844 and 1845 have had that effect; and taking the same average as we have already experienced during the period since 1842, we have arrived at the same result. The present income tax amounts to 5,550,000 l., and the additions now proposed being 590,000 l.—making a total of 6,140,000 l. The new permanent sources of revenue to meet the extinction of that tax will be, a legacy duty producing 2,000,000 l., spirit duties 436,000 l., licences 113,00 l.; making a total of 2,549,000 l. There will be an anticipated reduction of charge on the 3¼ per cents, the result of the operation of Mr. Goulburn's measure, amounting to 624,000 l. The average annual diminution of charge, according to that which has taken place during the last three years, will amount in seven years to 640,000 l. In the year 1860 will fall in the Long Annuities, being 1,292,000 l., with other annuities amounting to 854,000 l., making 2,146,000 l. So that the whole of the reductions of charge, and the permanent sources of income which I have mentioned, will amount together to 5,959,000 l., making an amount within 180,000 l. of the now existing income tax; so that, if the Legislature should think proper, the income tax
482
may be dispensed with without any charge or sacrifice. Now, my Lords, I must say that this appears to me to be a solid system of finance. It has already been received with great acceptation by the country, and has met with very general approval. I believe it to he a system under which—coupled as it is with great relief to the mass of the people, and persevering, as it does, with that system of free trade which has been so wisely adopted, and if we should be fortunate enough to preserve the inestimable blessings of peace which we have experienced for the last forty years—I believe it to be a system under which this country will see times of happiness and prosperity such as have not before been witnessed. My Lords, I beg to move the second reading of this Bill.
Moved —"That the Bill be now read 2a."
The EARL of DERBY: My Lords, I do not rise for the purpose of opposing the second reading of this Bill, because I am quite aware that the state of the finances of the country as just explained by the noble Earl is not such as would enable the present or any other Government to dispense with that large sum of money which is brought to the Treasury through the medium of this most objectionable tax. But I must say that the speech of the noble Earl appears to me, from first to last, to be a contradiction throughout of the premises he lays down, and the conclusions at which he arrives. I cannot help observing, further, that some of the noble Earl's calculations are so vague that it is absolutely impossible to reckon with any degree of certainty upon what may be the state of affairs in 1860. The noble Earl began by stating all the objections that have been urged to the income tax; the noble Earl admitted that it was unjust and inquisitorial in its character; and, following out the calculations and arguments which have been used in another place by the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he said this is a tax peculiarly suited to a time of war, and ought as far as possible to he retained for the emergency of war. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has further said, that it is a weapon which ought not to be held in our hands, but should be hung up within reach against the wall, ready to be brought to our aid in case of emergency. Having, however, established the entire unfitness of the tax as a source of ordinary revenue,

483
the noble Earl then proceeds to come to the conclusion, that, not in a time of war, but for the general service of the country in a time of profound peace, upon the arguments put forward by the noble Earl and his Colleagues, we should continue the tax for a period more than double the period for which it had been asked by any preceding Administration. It was stated in the first instance by Sir Robert Peel, when he introduced this system of taxation, that he calculated it would be required for three, or at most five, years, and that then it might be dispensed with; but as each succeeding Government found the period for which it was to endure coming to a close, every Government found itself, in consequence of the reductions of taxation made in the interim, in the position which rendered it absolutely necessary to ask for a continuance of the same tax for a further limited period, notwithstanding all the objections to which they admitted it to be open. But the difference between the proposals of all former Governments and this is, that, whereas they asked it to be renewed for a limited period in consequence of the actual state of the revenue, the noble Earl and his Colleagues ask for it in order to carry still further those principles of taxation on which the noble Earl pronounced so warm a eulogy. But, after having come to the conclusion, that, notwithstanding the objectionable nature of the tax, and its inquisitorial character altogether, it was still necessary to continue it for a longer period than ever it had been asked for on any former occasion, the noble Earl next proceeds to discuss the character and partiality and anomalies of the details of the tax; he tells you that it is inquisitorial and objectionable in its details; that it is impossible to deny that between various classes of the community it acts with gross and grievous injustice; and the consequence, I naturally thought, would be, that the noble Earl, in proposing the tax for so lengthened a period, would, at all events, do all in his power to remove that injustice and those inequalities to which he acknowledges it to be obnoxious. The noble Earl tells you it was the intention of the late Government to make certain modifications which he admits to have been equitable in principle; he did not allude to that description of property which is most favoured in the imposition of the income tax—namely, the funded and monied property of the country, where there are no deductions, where the income is permanent
484
and without any drawbacks; but he alluded to the intention of the former Government to make a distinction—which he admitted to be a just and equitable distinction in principle—in the amount of the tax paid by realised and precarious incomes. He says he did not know in what manner the late Government intended to carry their measure into effect, or what were the details of their plan, and he concluded that those plans were not matured. The noble Earl will forgive me if I remind him that he has come to a hasty conclusion, inas-much as the late Government had not the opportunity of bringing forward its Budget in detail, and nothing more was brought before Parliament than the general statement of the outlines of their general policy. The most important part of the policy of the Government was rejected; and, consequently, my right hon. Friend who was at that time Chancellor of the Exchequer never had the opportunity of explaining the manner in which he proposed to carry into effect the proposition of which the noble Earl acknowledges the justice, but, at the same time, he says he is not prepared to carry it into effect. The noble Earl takes credit for the financial ability and skill, and what may be called the strong conviction, which characterised the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer in bringing forward and supporting the proposition for maintaining the income tax with all its acknowledged injustice; and attributes the success attending the passage of the Income Tax Bill through the other House of Parliament to his powerful reasons even against the convictions and the facts of the right hon. Gentleman; but he forgot to recite among the prime inducements which might have obtained the acquiescence of the other House, that at the same time the Chancellor of the Exchequer undoubtedly deprived certain classes of the advantages they might have expected from the equalisation of the pressure of the income tax, by establishing a distinction between fixed and precarious incomes, he threw out, at the same time, a great boon to all those classes by the imposition of a new and most oppressive tax in the shape of a succession tax upon a description of property that has hitherto been exempt from it. Now, I have a very great respect for the power and great ability in debate and the arguments of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer; but I venture to retain my own opinion strongly

485
that the success of the income tax in its present amended form is not to be attributed to any power in the arguments of the right hon. Gentleman, but is owing to the counter attraction and the advantage of having a very heavy tax thrown upon real property, The noble Earl having established that the income tax is inquisitorial and improper—having next assumed, and, indeed, I may say proved, that the manner of its assessment is grossly unjust and partial—having come to the conclusion that it is right to continue that injustice and that partiality, proceeds to take credit to Her Majesty's Government for not making it a portion of the permanent revenue of the country, Now, so far from indicating any intention of relieving the country from the pressure of this tax, the Government actually ask for a continuance of it for more than double the period asked by any former Administration. it is true they do hold out a prospect, although a little clouded by various hints and insinuations (and certainly no man can tell what the state of the country may be at the end of seven years, or even seven months, or seven weeks)—they take credit for having provided for the remission of this tax at the end of seven years. Now, I wish I could believe what the noble Earl wishes the House to believe, that there will be any disposition—or indeed any power—on the part of the Parliament to give up the income tax at the expiration of seven years. I should have been more disposed to give the noble Earl and his Colleagues credit for really intending to act on the principles which they profess, of doing away with the income tax at the end of seven years, if they had begun earlier, or had proposed a more rapid diminution of the tax. But the fact is, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes to retain the tax at the full amount for a period of two years—he then continues diminishing it by a penny for a period of two years more. At the expiration of that time he takes off 2d. out of the 7d., and it then remains unaltered till the expiration of the seven years. At that period, all at once—it being admitted that it is impossible to get rid of the 7d. —he believes that at the expiration of seven years, Parliament will consent to get rid of the tax of 5d. —that is, requiring a surplus of between 4,000,000 l. and 5,000,000 l. sterling to enable them to do so. If the Government had proposed to reduce the tax by one penny each year for the period of seven years, I should have
486
thought that would carry with it the evidence of the sincerity of the Government, inasmuch as the reduction then would operate so gradually that it would probably have been within the limits of the ordinary surplus revenue of each year; whereas 5d, was manifestly beyond the extent of any probable surplus that would arise at that time. The noble Earl takes credit for saying that at the expiration of seven years there will be a sufficient surplus in the Exchequer to enable them to get rid of the tax. He enumerates some additional items, which I am quite prepared to give him credit for—namely, the conversion of the 3 per cents, consequent upon Mr. Goulburn's arrangement, and the falling in of the long annuities in 1860, which would give a considerable portion of the anticipated surplus. But, in order to make out this, first of all he takes the income tax to amount to 5,800,000 l.; he then shows that there will be, by the reduction he calculates upon, as a matter of course, in the charge for the interest of the debt, and these other reductions-—that there will be, in point of fact, a saving equal to the 5,800,000 l. which he is to lose by the remission of the income tax. But in order to establish this surplus he is obliged to go further, and to assume that the gradual reduction of the income tax will not only he recovered by the additional income derived from the extension of the tax to smaller incomes, but that the effect of the reduction of taxation generally would have been so great that the whole amount of the 5,800,000 l. will be made good to the revenue. No doubt there will be an increase in the revenue, and an increase in the consumption of the necessaries of life, arising from the reduction of taxation in many branches. But observe, that the whole question which he assumes, and the whole basis of the calculations on which he expects to get rid of the income tax at the end of seven years, is, that the amount of the increase should be so great as in itself to have restored the whole amount lost by those reductions, and bring hack the revenue to its original amount notwithstanding those reductions. My Lords, that is the merest speculation, the merest chance, on which it is absolutely impossible to form the slightest opinion or found the slightest calculation, which may be affected by a hundred different circumstances, and on which it is impossible to build the smallest possible data for calculation; and yet it is upon the accuracy of that calcu-

487
lation he depends, and it is upon the responsibility of it he rests, for the possibility of meeting the deficiency in the revenue occasioned by the remission of an income tax of 5,500,000 l. at the end of seven years. I shall now call your Lordships' attention to a few points in the argument of the noble Earl, which it appears, to me defeats itself, and to another upon which he has made a miscalculation, which when pointed out I am sure the noble Earl will himself admit. He says, calculating the revenue he will derive from the income tax, that its present amount is 5,500,000 l.—that he will have an additional sum of 250,000 l. arising from the extension of the tax to incomes below 150 l.—that its extension to Ireland will produce 400,000 l. more, this being the additional sum arising from its extension to classes who have not been hitherto subject to it. But he has forgotten that before the end of that period the tax will be reduced to 5d., and consequently the amount of the tax will be so much less. [The Earl of ABERDEEN was understood to dissent.] I may not be able? to follow out the whole of the noble Earl's financial statement; but it cannot be contended that the present produce of the income tax at 7d, is to be equalled by its future amount. Surely there is some mistake here affecting two-sevenths of the noble Earl's calculation—upon which calculation rests the present prospect of getting rid of the income tax at the end of seven years. I shall not enter into any further details; but if it is to be a permanent tax, which I am confident it will be, I do not dispute the theoretical justice of charging Ireland with her share of the income tax; but I cannot help thinking that, considering the calamities that Ireland has recently gone through, it would have been better to postpone it till the property of that country is better able to pay than it is at the present moment; but if it is to be a temporary tax, I hardly think it worth while to undertake the inconvenience of subjecting Ireland to it. I cannot, I repeat, object to the landed property of Ireland being taxed if it is to be a permanent one; but when the noble Earl, on the other hand, tells us that there will be a remission of 4,000,000 l. of the capital of the consolidated annuities, that appears to me the oddest species of compensation for the imposition of an income tax that can possibly be imagined. Because certain districts are so heavily burdened that
488
it is impossible for them to bear it, the noble Earl says, I will relieve them of a burden which it is impossible for them to bear, and that it is be taken as a compensation for a new burden on other parts of the country and other districts and individuals who have never before been subjected to the operation of this tax—it is like compensating one man for what he loses by taking something out of another man's pocket. The proposed measure may be a compensation to one class of indviduals; but it appears to me that it will be hard to show how the setting off of one class against another can be a compensation to both. My Lords, I have only one word more to say, and that is, as to the probable discontinuance of the income tax. The noble Earl takes great credit for following the system introduced by the late Sir Robert Peel, and the advantages derived from the constant reduction of duties and remission of taxation. But do you not observe that he thereby destroys his whole case? For although it may be true, as the noble Earl assumes, that, at the end of seven years this country may have recovered the revenue they are now sacrificing, and the income they are now giving up, provided no new deductions take place: if, during the course of these seven years, you are to go on reducing taxation, and making further remissions, yet, if you go on as fast as it recovers, taking off fresh taxes, and using up the surplus as fast as you make it, in order to carry out the principles of free trade—and that I have no doubt will be the case, with the present feeling of the country and of Parliament, and the noble Earl has himself declared his intention to pursue that course by the successive reductions of taxation—the effect will be to negative all his previous arguments, which rest upon the assumption that the remission of taxation will be recovered by the country. If the noble Earl goes on making fresh reductions, it is quite clear that, instead of having 5,500,000 l., there will not be a shilling more in the Exchequer, whether the country be prosperous or not, and that you will not have the available surplus you calculate upon. I do not now enter into the question as to whether the country is likely to be then in a more prosperous condition or not. All I say is, that if you go on as the Government say they intend to do, you will not have available the 5,000,000 l. of surplus which they calculated upon to enable you to get rid of the income tax.

489
I must say, I believe that there will be a perpetual reduction of taxes going on so long as there is any surplus to dispose of. I do not believe that Parliament will submit—more especially after the encouragement that has been given to a perpetual reduction of taxation—I do not believe that Parliament will submit for the next seven years to see a surplus accumulating which would amount to the whole surplus of 5,500,000 l. per annum, without being disposed to avail themselves of it, in order to bring the revenue and expenditure nearer together; consequently, they will defeat the object which the Government have in view of remitting the income tax at the end of seven years. I submit to the income tax, because I believe it to inevitable. Your Lordships are aware that you have no power of modifying or dealing with the details of a measure of this kind. I am not prepared to ask your Lordships to refuse altogether to do what may be necessary to maintain the credit of the country. I am not deluded by the suggestions on the part of the Government that it is intended to be merely a temporary tax, or to credit the evidence they have given of the sincerity of their determination to get rid of it within a limited period. I believe there must be, and that there will be, continual renewals of the tax, and that we must submit to it now with all its inequalities and all its injustice—that we must submit to a tax, nominally for seven years, but of which neither the noble Lord nor I shall ever see the end.
LORD PORTMANsaid, it might seem presumptuous in him to rise to address their Lordships immediately after the noble Earl the leader of a great party in this country; and it might also seem unnecessary that he should address them at all, considering that their Lordships had no power of making any alteration in Bills of this description; but he felt that he should not be doing the duty which he owed to the noble Lords who placed him in the chair of the Committee appointed by that House to consider the question of parochial assessments, if he did not call the attention of their Lordships to a clause in the present Bill, which was directly opposed to the unanimous recommendation of that Committee, and which seemed to him to be the insertion of the narrow end of the wedge, which at no distant period, he feared, would make a large fissure in the Exchequer. He alluded to that clause of the Bill which, for the first time in legislation,
490
acknowledged the principle that the profits, fees, and emoluments of the clergy were to be admitted as fit subjects of any allowance leading to a reduction of taxation, so far as concerned those charges which were incurred wholly and exclusively in the performance of clerical duties. He must say, that when he saw the charities of the country subjected to this tax, he did not think it quite wise to make this uncalled-for concession to the clergy. He knew one great hospital in this town, the revenue of which would be reduced by the imposition of the tax on successions to the extent of excluding no fewer than 250 patients a year; and when he saw that, and compared it with this concession to the clergy, he did think it was a matter which ought to be more fully explained than it had yet been before it became law; and the more so, because no mention of this matter had been made in Parliament by the promoters of the clause. He wished the House to look to the evidence given before the Committee on Parochial Assessments by Professor Jones, who thought that the utmost fair concession to the tithe-owner was the amount of the salary of the curate. Mr. Meadows White said that tithes were given for the purposes of the duty of the officer, and added, that an obligation to discharge the spiritual duties was the purchase price of the tithes. The Committee advised the House that no special deductions should be made for tithes, to which all other property is not entitled. The new view taken in this Income Tax Bill is full of danger to the Church. He begged to observe, also, that he thought they were extending too widely the basis of direct taxation. They all knew that indirect taxation was less felt than direct taxation, and hence was always paid more willingly. It had been stated that persons would be induced to bear this tax because some of its inequalities would be remedied by another direct tax which was now before the other House of Parliament. He doubted, however, the value of the arrangement, and would remind their Lordships, that as the total taxation on the income of the nation was about 33 per cent, and that direct taxation bore to indirect taxation the proportion of 5 to 7, it was unwise to add to the direct taxes. The indirect charges on direct taxes fell heavily on individuals; the indirect charges on indirect taxes fell on the nation, which was better able to bear the burden. He believed that a reaction must soon come in the public opinion on this subject, for the one was paid by Con-

491
straint, and of necessity, with ready money; while the other was paid by consent, and on credit. The income tax and local taxes must be paid on the day of demand. The taxes on tobacco and beer no one knew when he paid. He begged to remind them that when they talked of dealing with land, it must be divided into two divisions—that of land held under settlement, and land held in fee; land for life, where there was a life interest only, and land which a man might spend as he spent his money. He admitted that a great boon would be given by the arrangement in the Succession Duty Bill to land in fee. There could be no doubt about that; but, as regarded life interest, there would be no boon whatever. The concession was, that the lands should be valued as an annuity. As regarded land in fee it was a boon; but as regarded settled estates it was no boon, for by the present law, if land was left as a legacy by will for a life interest, it was valued just as Consols were valued—on the value of the life; and so both real and personal estates were on an equal footing; but, unless the clause was altered, land would pay one year's purchase higher than Consols would pay, as the tables of 1796 and of 1853 differed to that extent. The burden on an estate for life would be very heavy, as the tenant for life must borrow to pay the tax, and so begin with a debt, while the owner in fee could sell enough to pay the tax, or, by a bonâ fide gift to his successor during his life, could avert the tax; therefore, although a boon was given to lands held in fee, a heavy burden was laid on the holder of life interest. But who were the chief owners in fee? The commercial and monied men who had lately bought land, and who, in truth, were the great gainers by all the modern changes of taxation. This new tax was not quite understood. It was called 1, 3, or 10 per cent; but it was much more. Take a life of forty on the date of succession, and look to the table in the schedule, where it was shown that the son will pay on each 100 l. per annum, called I percent, 14 l.; the brother, called 3 per cent, would pay 42 l.; the Stranger in blood, called 10 per cent, would pay 140 l.; besides all the costs of valuation necessary to enable him to make a true return. Prom this last indirect expense Consols would be exempt, and therefore real estate was still unduly to be burdened. If, then, the Income Tax Bill, and the Bill which was to remedy the inconvenience of that measure, were to be made the foundation for the Parochial Assessments Bill next Session, he warned their
492
Lordships that they would afford no sufficient excuse for continuing to exempt from parochial assessment that property which hitherto had contributed nothing towards it.
LORD BERNBRSsaid, he considered the income tax as one of the most inquisitorial, unjust, and oppressive imposts that had ever been known in this country. Its inequalities were acknowledged even by the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself, and yet no attempt had been made to remove them. He, for one, was ready to bear his fair share in the taxation of the country; but he objected to this Bill, because, while it professed to impose an equal tax of 7d. in the pound upon all descriptions of property, it really imposed a tax of 9d. in the pound upon land—a description of property which was already more heavily burdened than it should be. Again, the succession tax, which it was said would remove the inequalities of the income tax, could be considered in no other light than a land tax. It was plain, therefore, that the landed interests had not justice done them in the financial arrangements of the present Government. Another objection he had to the income tax was, that, while tradesmen and others were assessed upon their net income, the owners and occupiers of land, on the contrary, were assessed upon their gross income. He found that the incidence of the income tax of 1803 was less offensive in this respect, inasmuch as it allowed certain necessary deductions to be made from the gross income of landowners and farmers, which were altogether omitted in the present Act. By 43 Geo. III., c. 122, these deductions were on account of land tax paid, public drainage rate, or fencing and repairs, 5 per cent if chargeable in Schedule B—2 per cent otherwise, also for tenths, procuratures, & c. He would extend the allowances made by the thirty-seventh section to the above payments, to expenses of drainage, of insurance, average repairs of buildings, and to all such outlays as the owner may covenant to make, to maintain the present value of the premises. He found the Act of 1803 imposed a penalty on surveyors for making vexatious surcharges: this was also omitted. He also complained of the mode in which the Commissioners for assessing the tax were appointed. He would allow all justices of peace, duly qualified, to act as Commissioners, as in the case of the land tax; but his chief objection was to the injustice inflicted upon the landed interest; and he maintained that if that injustice was removed, the tax would be rendered more

493
satisfactory, and more acceptable to the country.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, there were many great anomalies and inconsistencies in this tax beyond those which the noble Lord (Lord Berners) had pointed out. Take, for example, the case of money invested in improvements, or in trade, with the view of being replaced by profits in the future, but not immediately. Suppose that 10,000 l. were invested either in the improvement of land, or in trade or manufactures. The most prudent man so investing never looked forward to obtaining any return from it for the first two or three years. Well, but how was that dealt with? The instant it began to yield income, it was pounced upon by the Income Tax Comsioners, and taxed, just as if it were ordinary income. But this, in point of fact, amounted, not to a tax upon income, but to a tax upon capital; because when the party invested his 10,000 l. he did it with the expectation that the profits which would accrue at a distant period would compensate him for having received no profit at all during the first two or three years, and would ultimately replace his capital with a profit. To take those profits, then, as the measure of taxation, was taxing, not the income, but the very capital. He stated this as one of many objections; but to it, as well as to many of those difficulties and objections which had been pointed out by the noble Lord, and by others, there was one observation applicable, which was, that it was inevitable, and that no modification which could be made in the tax could ever relieve it from that objection—could ever get over that difficulty—could ever remove that injustice or inconsistency. There were other objections which arose from the very nature of the tax itself. For example, it pressed heavily upon one species of income, and unjustly, as it was said. He did not call it unjust. He called it unequal and inexpedient that it should be so apportioned; but he did not call it unjust, and there were reasons why it should not be called unjust. An income arising from fee-simple property was dealt with precisely in the same way as income arising from settled property. The income of a tenant in fee was taken exactly as the income of a tenant for life. That was a hardship. He did not see that it was impossible, as in some other cases, by any modification, to get rid of that anomaly; hut the difficulty was extreme. Again,
494
there was another case. Income arising from property of any sort, whether land or personalty, was dealt with exactly in the same way as income which was the fruit of labour; so that a person working as hard as he could in order to support himself, to maintain his family, and to lay up a certain provision for old age, or the day of sickness, was taxed exactly in the same way, to a penny, on his income so gained, as the person who derived his income either from landed possessions, or from capital invested in trade, or the funds. This was another inequality, no doubt, which, however, might be lessened. Nevertheless, the difficulties of arranging this, when they came to be examined, had been found to be, he was going to say, insuperable. Certainly they were all but insuperable, and that it was which had made his Friend, the late Lord Melbourne, say in 1842, that he was quite aware of the great hardship of the tax; that he was quite aware of its pressure upon every class; but that that, in his view, constituted its great recommendation, because no property escaped, and everybody was compelled to pay. The answer to that, however, was obvious. "True, everybody is compelled to pay; but might they not be compelled to pay in different proportions, so as to relieve them, to a certain degree, from the pressure, and to lessen the inequality of the tax?" Still, all those who had dealt with this subject, both in former times and more recently, had found that the nearer one examined it, the more evident it became, that partly from the difficulty of finding a due and just scale, and partly from the great and inevitable risk of evasions, it was impossible so to construct the tax so as to meet these objections. These were not the only difficulties and objections. There was one which could be remedied by no modification whatever, and that was the inquisitorial nature of the tax. Inquisitorial as to the possessors of landed estates it really might be said not to be, because it was perfectly immaterial to the landowner what publication was made of the amount of his income in a given parish, inasmuch as it was perfectly well known to all the inhabitants of that parish. His burdens, probably, were less known, but even those, perhaps, were generally guessed at. The injury to him, therefore, was exceedingly trifling compared with the injury to other persons. How was it with those who were engaged in trade, and, perhaps, in that moderate

495
amount of speculation which was essential to trade, and which was of a perfectly justifiable nature? The disclosures made by the inquisition of this tax might be not merely most prejudicial, but almost fatal, to the credit and prospects of a person engaged in business. Then, with respect to professional incomes. He did not say that such inquisition and disclosures were so prejudicial to the professional man as to persons deriving their income from profits in trade; but still it was annoying, galling, and distressing to him to find the amount of his income disclosed; and, although, no doubt, generally speaking, the Commissioners appointed under the Act had a due regard to the importance of secrecy, yet it had been more or less found that by degrees the truth, and sometimes what was not the truth, but the merest guesses and facies, oozed out, and became the subject of exceedingly vexatious discussions and criticism. Independently of the disclosure which was one evil, the mere inquisition was a great evil. To call on a man to disclose his private affairs, even where this was not attended with damage to his interests, was vexatious in a very high degree. This was an evil inherent in the tax, and which no modification of the tax could remedy: if they wanted to tax a man's income they must first get at it, and he did not see how that could be better done than under the present system. For these various reasons, an income tax was a tax which he had always regarded with the greatest dislike, and which he had done his best, in former years, to oppose. It was now thirty-seven years since, by an accidental majority of thirty-seven votes, he had the satisfaction of putting an end to the tax in the other House, aided by a noble Friend of his not now in his place, who fought with him against the tax for the whole six weeks of the contest—a contest in the course of which, he would venture to say, not one argument was adduced in favour of the tax which bore investigation for one single moment without being completely disposed of. In 1842, and again in 1851, moved by the various objections to the tax, which he had already stated, he moved a series of resolutions on the subject, in which he contended that the income tax could not safely, and ought not in justice, to be imposed, except under peculiar circumstances—except as wedded to war, except as the inevitability of some severe financial pressure which could not otherwise be obviated. On the former oc-
496
casion his illustrious Friend, now, unhappily, no more, the noble Duke, then sitting on the Ministerial bench, and his noble Friend Lord Ripon, then President of the Board of Trade, said not one word, either of them, in favour of the tax itself, or against the principle of the string of resolutions which he moved in opposition to the tax, except precisely on the ground of the necessity of the tax as a temporary provision to meet an extraordinary pressure. He was, to a certain extent, relieved at the assurance that his noble Friend the noble Earl (the Earl of Aberdeen) regarded this continuance of the tax as only a temporary continuance for a certain limited period, thus bringing the measure now moved within the scope of that of 1842, which was declaredly a measure only justified by necessity, and to be continued only so long as the necessity should exist. He was afraid that his own chance of benefiting by the announced discontinuance of the tax in 1860 was by several years smaller than that of his noble Friend, supposing the tax then to cease; but his distinct impression was that neither those living at the end of the current seven years, nor those living at the end of the next following seven years, would see the end of this, to him, execrable tax. He by no means indulged in the sanguine expectations of his noble Friend on the subject. That peace was now about to be disturbed, God forbid that he or any one should have reason to apprehend; though that war was not to be apprehended before the next seven years should have elapsed, who could venture to say? An income tax unjustified by absolute State exigency appeared to him worse than any other tax—save a tax on the food of the people—save a tax on the knowledge of the people—save a tax on law for the people; and with this conviction he should be, on principle, quite as ready now as before, to propose the resolutions which he proposed in relation to the Income Tax Bill of 1842; but, accepting the statement of the Government as to the necessity of the measure, he would offer to it no further opposition than the expression of his opinion on the principle of the tax.
The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDEsaid, that as one of those who opposed the introduction of this tax by the late Sir Robert Peel in 1842, he must beg to say that he had never ceased to feel the objections which he then stated to the principle. He should not offer any direct opposition to the proposal of the Government; he only

497
wished he could regard it as of so limited a duration as that indicated by his noble Friend; but his opinion was, that when 1860 came, the Chancellor of the Exchequer of that day, be he who he might, would find himself in no position to discontinue the impost now proposed to be continued. Moreover, he considered it an extremely dangerous tax, inasmuch as it might enable a strong Government to encourage extravagance; while, on the other hand, it might be taken advantage of by a powerful and unscrupulous Opposition to deprive the Government of an indispensable branch of revenue. It was dangerous, also, because it partook of the nature of graduated direct taxation, which, despite the principles which the right hon. framer of the measure had so eloquently enunciated, he had, nevertheless, introduced into this measure, which, while it, as was admitted, practically taxed the landed interest 9d. in the pound, taxed another interest 7d., and another 5d. He did not object to the principle of the extension of the tax to Ireland, but he did object to the mode in which it was proposed to be levied and collected in that country. It was proposed by the Bill to collect the tax from the landlord before he had received one shilling of the rent on which his payment should be based, and this he thought most objectionable. He did not wish to subject the country to the inconvenience that might arise from the alteration of this Bill, and the sending of it back to the other House, but he thought it might be practicable for the Government to introduce another Bill remedying this and other injustices. If, however, this was to last for seven years, he, for one, should never cease in his opposition to it. Another point to which he wished to allude was, that he did not see that any provision was made for the consideration of the repayment of that part of the income which went to pay the rentcharges in Ireland. He thought the noble Earl should not have left those provisions of the Bill, which were entirely new provisions, without explanation or remark; and, as regarded Ireland, he considered it very unwise and very unjust to have laid this tax upon that country at a time like the present; for there never was a moment when there was more reason to give further inducements there to the outlay of capital and to improvement, and thus to give strength to the springs of her nascent prosperity. There was still great pressure, and he thought that it would therefore hare been right to postpone it at
498
least for another year. As to the ground on which the tax was so extended to Ireland, it had no basis in reason, justice, or practically in fact; instead of, at least, proceeding on the principle that the taxation of Ireland and England should be assimilated, the framers of the measure held it out as a bargain with Ireland—as a commutation, upon very favourable terms to Ireland, for those consolidated annuities, the real nature of which had been so well exposed before their Lordships' Committee. It was unfair to represent the whole of those consolidated annuities as a debt due from Ireland, when, in point of fact, it had been shown that a large portion of them could not only not be recovered, but were not in justice demandable. The real statement of the case, then, was, that the Government called upon Ireland to pay upwards of 400,000 l. a year, in order to be relieved from the payment of little more than 200,000 l. a year, which was the utmost extent which she ought to be required to pay in respect of the consolidated annuities.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEsaid, that the continuance of the tax, at the end of the seven years, must entirely depend, of course, on the decision of the then existing Legislature; but he begged, most emphatically, to deny, on his own part, and, he might add, on the part of the Government, that in proposing the present continuance of the tax for the term specified, they had any contemplation of its extending beyond that period. It would be wholly opposed to the opinions which he had ever declared, were he to sanction this tax as a portion of the permanent taxation of the country. He should be the most inconsistent of human beings were he now to support any such theory. He had uniformly opposed the tax, as a permanent tax, not only upon his own judgment, hut upon the confirmatory judgment of Sir Robert Peel, of Lord Grenville, of Lord Grey, of nearly all the most eminent statesmen of the last twenty years; and he was glad to avail himself of the present opportunity to state, that in no degree had he changed his opinion on this point. The noble Lord opposite had assumed that, by introducing the date of seven years into the Bill, the Government had taken a course different from any former Government, as implying that the tax would be engrafted on the financial system of the country. Now, the ground upon which the date was introduced, was precisely the

499
reverse. It was done on the assumption, which he contended was a just one, that, while permitting the continuing of the tax for such a period, in the meantime they were providing the means of getting rid of the tax altogether. The sole ground upon which that duration of time was justified, was, that they were in a position of things upon which they could rely with confidence, and which justified their expectation that, at the end of seven years, it would he in their power to put an end to the tax. They had the satisfaction of finding that the diminution of certain imposts which checked trade and cramped the resources of the country had had the effect of extending that trade and increasing those resources; thereby furnishing the country with the prospective means of adding to the revenue, and putting it into the power of Parliament to extinguish this tax. What could the Government do, but put it into the power of a future Parliament to get rid of the tax? They could not tie up the hands of future Parliaments or future Governments. If they had abolished the tax, it might have been revived by a future Government; but that which the present Government could do was to recognise the expediency and practicability of getting rid of the tax—and that was what he contended this Bill did. It contained in itself the elements of gradual diminution, showing an intention on the part of the Government that the tax should be extinguished. He did not know whether, in his peculiar position, he was to consider himself in office or out of office; but in one capacity or another, he might state his belief, that those who lived to Bee 1860 would see an end to this tax, provided Parliament at that time was so disposed; and that was all that, under the circumstances, the Government could engage for, and all that their Lordships could seek to obtain. In all that had been said against this tax as a permanent tax, he entirely agreed; he thought it was to the greatest degree objectionable—a tax upon improvements— but, above all, objectionable by being inquisitorial, and by being inquisitorial not merely upon the purses but upon the feelings of those who paid it. That alone made it a matter of great consideration to get rid of the tax. Another objection was, the essential indispensable inequalities which were connected with the tax—inequalities which every Minister and Parliament desired to get rid of, but which no Minister had been able to do; which would
500
be intolerable if the tax was permanent, and which were only tolerable because it was temporary. Upon these grounds he recognised the necessity of adopting the renewal of a tax in the shape in which it was proposed, extending it only for a limited period, and providing for its gradual extinction as it approached the period of its termination in 1860, which he trusted many of their Lordships would live to see. He could not but say that his noble Friend had hardly fairly stated the bargain between this country and Ireland upon this subject, when he said the consolidated annuities ought to have been got rid of altogether, on grounds entirely distinct from the extension of this tax to Ireland. [The Marquess of CLANRICARDE made an observation.] If his noble Friend did not mean that, a great part of his argument fell to the ground, because, although he agreed with his noble Friend that it was not consistent—he would not say with the justice, but with the mercy of Parliament—to require the repayment of the whole of those moneys, yet it was a moment for enabling the Government to do that which no Government could have done unless they had accompanied it by the income tax, namely, to sweep away the whole of the consolidated annuities altogether, and efface every vestige of a series of complicated demands, which had been a dead weight upon that part of the Empire, and had tended more than anything else in many districts to check its progress. He thought that the arrangement was advantageous to Ireland, and that in extending this tax to Ireland, not only were they doing that which was right, but were doing it in a manner to make it bear fairly upon the property of the country. He believed, as he had stated, that the tax would be got rid of at the end of the period mentioned in the Bill. He admitted that the tax was one which it was desirable should be reserved for times of war; but he believed that it was justified by its probable results at present, and that whenever war did come, then this tax would be found a powerful giant ready to be enlisted in the service of the country, appropriated to the great object of military defence, and placing its finance, and with its finance its military power, foremost among the nations of the world, and enabling this country to maintain the proudest position a country could occupy.
The EARL of WICKLOWsaid, it was not his intention to offer the slighest opposition

501
to the proposal that the tax should he extended to Ireland, for he confessed that he did not think the generally impoverished condition of that country could he put forward as a reason why persons possessed of a certain amount of property there should not he subject to a charge imposed on persons possessing the same amount of property in this country. He should further say that he thought it was an exceedingly judicious plan on the part of the Government to have taken the opportunity afforded by the imposition of that tax to remit the consolidated annuities. In his opinion, of all taxes that could be imposed on Ireland, the income tax was the least objectionable; and he should have considered that Ireland ought to have been subject to her fair proportion of taxation, whether that odious tax, the consolidated annuities, had or had not been withdrawn. He, however, saw some difficulties as to the mode of assessment, and these he wished removed. The noble Earl would, perhaps, inform them at this stage what system was to be adopted, and whether it would be that of England or of Scotland. He would not ask the noble Earl to give an answer at the present moment, but he hoped his attention would be directed to the question when the Bill went into Committee. It was very true, it might be said, that the other mode of assessment was adopted in Scotland; but the object of Irishmen was to resemble, not the Scotch but the English mode of assessment, and to enjoy the principles of English law. There was a vast difference in the mode of assessing the tax in England and in Scotland; and as there was always a vast amount of rent in arrear in Ireland, he felt convinced that, if the Scotch mode of assessment were adopted, the loss it would entail upon the landed proprietors in Ireland would be more than they were able to bear.
Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the whole House on Thursday next.

ENCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) ACT CONTINUANCE BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, said, their Lordships were aware that the original measure passed the House of Parliament in 1849, and was appointed to continue for three years. Its object was to enable persons having encumbrances on estates, or the owners of encumbered estates, to apply
502
to a Court thereby constituted, entitled the Encumbered Estates Court, and upon such application the Commissioners proceeded to sell such estates, disposed of the money obtained by the sale in a summary way, and gave to the purchaser what was called a Parliamentary title. The Act remained in force till the end of July last year, when another Act was passed, continuing the Court for one year more. He now proposed the second reading of a Bill which was intended to continue that Court for four years longer, but applications for sales to be made within two years. When his attention was first called to this subject, he felt that it was hardly consistent with good legislation that this Court should continue side by side with the Court of Chancery, to whose proper functions the duties of this exceptional Court seemed properly to appertain. He had communicated with the Lord Chancellor of Ireland on the subject, who quite concurred with him, as did the other Members of the Government, that it was extremely important that the functions of the Encumbered Estates Court should ultimately be transferred to the Court of Chancery in Ireland, and be made part of the ordinary business of that Court; but before that could be done, it was essential that the Court of Chancery in Ireland should be reformed in the same way as the Court of Chancery in England, by the discharge of the Masters in Chancery from the duties they had been wont to discharge, and leaving them to be executed by the Judges themselves, thus making Chancery proceedings in the two countries as nearly alike as possible. But until that was done, it would not be consistent with the interests of the Irish public that any alteration should be made in the constitution of the Encumbered Estates Court; and therefore it was considered that the best course would be, still further to continue the Court for a limited time, and with that view he asked their Lordships to concur in the present Bill. The Bill contained a number of new clauses, which had been suggested by the Commissioners—men of great learning— and it was impossible to conceive that the functions of the Court could have been discharged more efficiently than they had been by them; and they had found, in the course of their experience, several defects in the existing Act, which it was found desirable to remove. For instance, in the original Act the Commissioners had only power to sell leases of sixty years and up-

503
wards: it was now proposed to enable them to sell leases of any length of time. At present they could not sell an estate unless the incumbrance amounted to a given proportion of the rent: it Was now proposed to allow them to sell irrespective of the amount of the incumbrance. Then their Lordships were aware that an Act passed some time ago to give the holder of a perpetual lease the fee-simple of the land, but at the same time securing to the owner what interest he might have in the land. When these leases came into Court to be sold, the conversion could only take place through the Court of Chancery: it was now proposed to give the Encumbered Estates Court the power of making the conversion at the time of selling the lease. There were a number of other alterations of a technical nature, into which he would not enter; he might only mention that one great inconvenience had been felt, in consequence of the building where the Commissions met being situated about a mile from the other Courts of Law: that inconvenience the Government now proposed to remedy. He would move the second reading of the Bill.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, he had always been a warm supporter of the principle of this Bill. He thought such a measure to be necessary, on account of the peculiar circumstances of Ireland; but he went further still, for he saw no reason why the principle on which the Court was founded should not be permanently interwoven with their legal system. Cheap and expeditious justice and the creation of a clear Parliamentary title were not luxuries to be confined exclusively to the owners of Irish Encumbered Estates. He rejoiced, however, that the present Bill had been introduced, for he knew that many persons — apprehensive that the Bill was not about to be renewed—were forcing on sales of property, that they might have the advantage of this Court before its extinction. He was also glad to hear that his noble and learned Friend not only introduced this Bill, but that he promised Ireland a large measure of Chancery reform, such as had lately been given to England. But what he chiefly wished to call their Lordships' attention to was the desirableness of getting rid of the limited application implied in the title of the Bill, and applying its principles to all estates, whether they were encumbered or not. It had originally been recommended to them as
504
a measure for the relief of encumbered estates; but its practical operation was at present to inflict a severe penalty upon the owners of estates that were not encumbered. Suppose an encumbered estate, and one that was free from debt, were both to be sold, the owner of the free estate would find that he offered it for sale at a grievous disadvantage, because he would not be able to convey a title so clear and satisfactory as the simple Parliamentary title created for the encumbered estate—an advantage which gave a considerably increased value to the latter. The owner of the free estate could not go into the Encumbered Estates Court, for the single reason that his estate was not encumbered; he must, therefore, submit to the operose and expensive process of the Court of Chancery, instead of getting a speedy judgment and sale in the Encumbered Estates Court. He thought, therefore, that the present state of the law operated as a great disadvantage to persons whose estates were free from encumbrance. What was the principle of the Act? It was to give speedy justice and a secure title. He wanted to know what reason there was why these benefits should not be given to landowners who were free from debt, as well as to those who were encumbered? He remembered when the Bill was first introduced, he suggested the propriety of giving to the purchasers of these estates a simple and clear title by Act of Parliament; and by a short and simple conveyance set out in the Statute. His proposition was not entertained, and on high legal authority, that of the Chief Justice (Lord Campbell), he was told that such a suggestion only showed the danger of unlearned persons meddling with the law, as such a proposal could not be carried out without violating all the principles of equity. But when the second Bill was introduced in the following year, to his astonishment and delight, he found that the very principle was introduced which the year before he was told was so dangerous. He must confess that the Encumbered Estates Court had been unpopular in Ireland, in consequence of the distress of the country having forced land into the market in great qualities and prematurely, and so depressing its price; but the same thing would have happened though no Encumbered Estates Court had been in existence—with this difference, however, that instead of the money being distributed among the owners at little expense, the

505
greater part of it would have gone in the costs of law proceedings. He hoped, therefore, that this Bill would hereafter be interwoven with the general law of the country, that it would be made permanent, and that so useful an example would not be thrown away upon England.
Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the whole House on Thursday next.
House adjourned till To-morrow.