Friudrs nn Vrntrdings in paltanint.
PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.
Bonn op LORDS. Monday, Dec. 6. The Free-trade Policy; Lord Clanricarde's Itesolntion withdrawn, and an Amendment by Lord Harrowby carried nem. con.— French Empire; Lord Malmesbury's Speech. Tuesday, Dec. 7. Select Committees; .Names and Votes to be recorded. Thursday, Dec. 9. Oaths in Chancery; Bill passed. Friday, Dec.10. Tenant Right; Explanation; Government will not agree to the principle of Mr. Sergeant Shee a Bill. Hoesz op Commons. Monday, Dec. 6. Supply; Supplementary Estimates voted —Railway Amalgamation; Committee appointed—Board of Health ; Bill to confirm Orders.
Tuesday, Dec. 7. Parliamentary Papers for gratuitous distribution; Committee to inquire—Supply; Report of Supplementary Estimate received—Tenant's Com- pensation, Land Improvement, Leasing Powers, Landlord and Tenant, and Tenant ht (Ireland) Bills ; committed to a Select Committee—County Expenditure; Mr. Milner Gibson 's Bill reintroduced, and read a first time.
Wednesday, Dec. 8. Parliamentary Electors; Sir De Lacy Evans's Rate-paying Clauses Bill, thrown out by 103 to 87 on the second reading—County Polls Bill, as amended, considered in Committee—Ways and Means ; Committee- Thursday. Dec. 9. Sugar Legislation ; Mr. James Wilson's Statement, and Sir John Fakington's Answer—Railway Amalgamation ; Committee named—Ways and Means ; Resolution reported. Friday, Dec. 10. The Budget ; Committee on the Inhabited House-duty ; debate adjourned—Board of Health Bill, read a second time.
TIME-TABLE.
The Lords.
Hour of Hour of
Meeting. Adjournment.
The Commons.
Hour of Hour of Meeting. Adjournment.
Monday
bh .... 91i 15m Monday 411 .(na) 11113m Tuesday bh . 511 40m Tuesday 41.■ .(m) lb 30.m Wednesday No sitting. Wednesday Noon .... lh 45m Thursday 5h 5h 15ra Thursday th . ith .01n Friday bh Sh 55m Friday 4h ..(m) 121145m Sittings this Week, 4; Time, Oh Sittings this Week, 5 ; Tilne,341i 15m this
Sexton, 18; — 23h 20m
— this Session, 22; — 110h15ist
FREE-TRADE POLICY IN THE LORDS.
Before Lord Clanricarde made his motion, on Monday, Earl GnAm- "VILLE, who had a notice on the paper, respecting the proceedings of Se- lect Committees, stated that he was willing to postpone his motion.; and he should have previously postponed it, had he expected there was to be either general acquiescence or a general debate on the subject of Free- trade. But Lord Derby's resolution, adopted by Lord Clamicarcle,7- which appeared to him totally unmeaning as a declaration of opinion,— had:obtained some value from a former declaration of Lord Derby that he considered it bound the House firmly and unreservedly to the system re- cently established. The House appeared also to have come to a some- what hurried understanding that there should be no very great discus- sion. And under these circumstances the slightest intimation from either side would induce him to postpone his motion.
The Earl of RADNOR wished to say that he was no party to the under- standing referred to. It was some years since he had set his foot in the House, and there was no chance of his being there again; but when he saw the resolution about to be proposed by Lord Clanricarde, so entirely perversive of the principles already sanctioned, he came up to town for the purpose of moving an amendment.
Upon this Lord Gnarl-max postponed his motion, and the debate pro- ceeded.
The Marquis of CLArtRICARDE, in moving the resolution drawn by Lord Derby, found himself in that position not uncommon to men who desire to produce unanimity by concession—he was opposed more or less by all parties. The grounds which made it necessary that the House should move on the question under consideration were nearly the same as those stated in the House of Commons,—first that the subject had been brought di- reotly before them; and next, that it was desirable the House should affirm " recent legislation." At considerable length Lord Clanricarde developed these propositions. As to the terms in which that affirmation should be made, he preferred the resolutions agreed to elsewhere ; and he could not under- stand why Lord Derby chose to draw a distinction between a vote of the Lords and the vote of his friends and colleagues in the other Howse of Parliament. Either Lord Derby and his colleagues did not sincerely agree with their colleagues in the House of Commons, or they felt them- selves weak in the House of Lords and unable to carry the measures they desired to carry. He moved the following resolution- " That this House, thankfully acknowledging the general prosperity, and deeply sensible of the evils attending frequent changes in the financial policy of the country, adheres to the commercial system recently established ; would view with regret any renewed attempt to disturb its operation or pede its further progress."
The Earl of ABERDEEIt would have been.00ntent to leave the ula precisely as it stood ; because the House had pronounced a very dee., opinion upon the subject in 1846. Since 1648 nothing had been done dioating- die elighteat intention towards reaction. • Notwithstanding vehement speeches of Lord Derby and his-friends-in opposition, the lit of Lords is not a changing body, like the Commons. The men and the opie ions are the same as in 1846. The Corn-law question is finally settled, whatever their vote might be it would not affect it. If they affirmed, al would affirm what is already firmly established ; if they voted a negatj. they would only exhibit the impotence of that House when opposed the strong desire of the country. The late elections, public opinion, late vote of the House of Commons, and the declarations of Minisi show that the question is not only settled, but that the time is come v he, as one of the oldest and most intimate friends of Sir Robert p must feel fully justified in congratulating the friends of that great 11" ter' and the Hansel and the country, on the -final and complete success the system for which he suffered so much and made so great a sacriE, The name of Sir Robert Peel, which was pursued with so much per. vering and relentless hostility, may now be received with blessings c. remembered as that of the benefactor of his country. It was not to expected that noble Lords opposite would join in this language ; theless' it is the language sanctioned by the country, and the feeling dect' impressed on the hearts of the people. Lord Aberdeen had never expected to see such a resolution submithd them as that proposed by Lord Clanricarde. lie bad taken it for gra; that Lord Derby was bound to move the adoption of the resolution pa::.: in the House of Commons. It had been said that resolution was a coral! . anise but surely you are as much bound to assent cordially to an accq. . compromise as if at were your original proposition. Therefore he could understand the motive for lbjecting to it, particularly as the success of resolution was regarded by Ministers as a species of triumph. The resolet. first suggested by Lord Clanricarde—(originally the abandoned amendim... moved by the Chancellor of the Exchequer)—was not at all to Lord Ala- deen's taste ; still it did acknowledge that some benefits had arisen from L. Free-trade system. But as to the resolution suggested by Lord Derby L. accepted by Lord Clanricarde, "if," said Lord Aberdeen, "I did not I. that this question is removed altogether beyond your power, and that country entertain a very different opinion, I think that this resolution v-ou:a be a greater step to reaction than any we have seen since the year 1846." mg resolutidn acknowledged the general prosperity, but attributed it to Pron. dence alone ; which he would be the last to deny ; but in that as in other things Providence had blessed human agency. Then it stated that the House adhered to the system, and would regret to see it impeded, beam change is inconvenient. Lord DERBY here struck in hotly—" The word is evils,' not 'income. nience.' If the noble Earl wishes to make comments upon the resolution, let him at all events take care that he is commenting upon that which it contains."
Lord ABERDEEN would not make any comment which he did not feel con- scientiously applicable to the resolution. He had stated its substance. The word was "evils," not inconvenience, certainly ; but would mere change-. say from a bad to a good system—bean "evil' ? If we adhere to the system, it is because it is wise and just. He must protest against a resolution which was so immeasurably below the amount of his own convictions.
Lord BEAUMONT, giving Ministers credit for a sincere desire to carry out the Free-trade policy in future, was in favour of adopting the reso- lutions passed in the House of Commons, as the best pledge of that sin. cerity from the landed interest He had no wish to insult those who had acted in opposition in.1846 ; and he contended that the vote of the other House was not an insult ; for if it had been, how could such men as Mr. Cayley have supported it ? He made merry with the conduct of Lord Clantticarde in successively' taring up with the resolution agreed to by the House of Commons and with the tunoulment, of the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; abandoning them' " with his usual complaisance," when °b- leated to by Lord Derby ; and then accepting a resolution dictated by the Premier.
" It might have been supposed that the noble Marquis's complaisance vas now exhausted. Bet at all. The noble Earl said to him, You have aban- doned your own resolution, withdrawn that approved, of by the Cabinet, and accepted mine ; now I want you to go a step further, and move my resolution yourself.' (Laughter.) To be sure I wilt' said the noble Marquis ; and he had kept his word." (Much laughter-) What advantage could there be in passing the resolution before them? Why not take the plain and simple course of adopting the resolution passed by the House of Commons? When Lord Derby came into power, he might have done as he pleased with regard to Protection but he bad adopted a dangermis and unconstitutional view of the duty of daverament, and instead of gding to the country with a policy, he went to the country to know what he was to do. By refusing to accept the resolution passed by the Commons, Lord Derby was casting a slur upon those Members Of the Government who voted for that resolution. Lord Beaumont moved as an amendment, the resolutions finally passed by the House of Commons. The question having been put, and no Peer rising to address the House, the Earl of Drain- rose, and said he could not allow the question to mar in absolute silence. He briefly recounted the conversations of Tuesday and Thursday last week, which ended in Lord Clanricarde's accepting, "after consulting his friends," the resolution before flab, and. consenting to move it. Then, turning upon Lord Beaumont, who profeised that on Thursday be was telen so much by surprise that he lost the power of speech, Loyd Derby said, "Now I must say that when the noble Baron loses that, he must be in a very bad way indeed !" But he had time for reflection ; be slept over it ; he came down again on Friday night: was his breath still taken away ? It was his duty to have given notice of his amendment. Instead of that, he now came Clown, when Lord Derby bad sent away his friends, and the Ministry were to be subjected to a hostile division. Independently of the merits of the question, could they sup- port the amendment ? He was not prepared to say whether any resolutions were necessary on the part of the Government ; but he made no objection to placing on record the principles upon which they intend to act. They had redeemed their pledges es and declarations. All the characteristic features of the Budget stamp it, not a Protectionist, but as a Free-trade budget. Their financial measures are the best proofs that could be given of their intentions. But what is the object in this debate ? There was hardly a single instance among those who new ar- dently support Free-trade in which their votes have not been recorded against
this immutable principle. Lord Clanricarde himself had voted against the principle of Free-trade, more especially in corn. The Marquis of Clanricarde
slated, " When ?"] " In 1839." Lord Fitzwilliam brought forward a mo- tion in that year on the subject of Free-trade, and " Lord Somerhill's proxy is one of those which appears in opposition to that motion." Lord Beaumont Toted. against it in 1846, and joined in Lord Derby's protest. " I do not,"
be continued, " wish to taunt any noble Lord with changing his opinions : we are all liable to change our opinions, and God forbid that I should taunt
any man on the subject. What I was about to say was, that if the noble Lords opposite are sincere and earnest in their wish to produce the greatest possible effect upon the country by the affirmation of the Free-trade prin-
ciple by this House, then the course which they ought to take is to affirm that principle in such a manner as shall secure the largest number of Peers to vote in favour of that resolution, without doing violence to their own feel-
ings. And it was, on that ground (as I took the liberty of explaining to your
Lordships) that, studiously abstaining from dealing with the past, or from offeringany opinion on the part of the House as to the abstract policy or the
abstract justice of the measures—with regard to which there might be dif- ferences of opinion—I affirmed a resolution which, so far as any resolution can pledge the House for the future, pledged it to the adoption and carrying into effect the principles of Free-trade." One word with regard to what had fallen from Lord Aberdeen. Lord Derby would be jealous of saying anything which would appear to cast a
slight upon the memory of Sir Robert Peel—" my lamented friend, as, I think, in spite of our political qui differences, I may venture to call him." It
wail rote natural that his friends should wish to adopt a resolution com- mendatory of the policy which that statesman adopted. But "the com- mendation of that policy would be the very point upon which noble Lords who have not changed their opinions would be unable to concur in the reso- lution."
He defended the terms of the resolution ; and insisted that it recognized the prosperity of the country, and admitted, not the inconvenience, but the certain evil of frequent change. "I am lost in astonishment when I see the
noble Earl, who has a peculiar mission, and peculiar opportunities, in con- unction with those friends who act with him, for smoothing over differences
tween parties, of acting as a sort of impartial mediator, and of giving a friendly opposition, to the Government, if compelled to give any opposition
to them at all, but-whom I should not have expected to see doing anything
to create a breach between the great Conservative party,---I say I did hear with astonishment from.hlin comments upon the resolution which the noble Marquis accepted from my hands, not called for by the words, and width I do not think were founded. upon a fair and rational interpretation of the words. , _The noble Earl called this a reactionary motion. A reactionary
motion !—a motion indicative of a desire to depart from, a particular system
of policy, which pledged the House to adhere to it !—a motion which showed an intention to depart from that system, and which in terms expressed the
regret with which it would view any attempt to disturb its operation, to re- new the discussion of the question, or-to interfere with or impede the fur, ther progress of the policy !" Such a construction might have been ex- peeled, from a violent oppouent, but not from one "whose professions, per- sonal and politiefil, were on such a footing with ours:*
Here Lord Derby made a penional explanation with respect to the treat, meat Sir Robert Peel had met with in 1848. "From that time to this—I do not use the words offensively—I will defy the warmest friends of the late Sir Robert Peel to point out a single expression of mine, either in writing or speaking, derogatory to the character or affecting the integrity of the mo- toes of that statesman : and the only serious misunderstanding which I ever had with my noble and much-lamented friend the late Lord George Bentinck—a misunderstanding, I am glad to say, which was thoroughly re- moved before his untimely death—was upon a full and frank expression of my opinion that nothing could be more unfitting or more impolitic than to load with the terms of vituperation those from whom we had been compelled conscientiously to differ." (Loud arias of " Hear! ") But if 1846 wore to pane over again, he was not prepared to say he would not take the same course. However that might be, it was time to put an end 'to a hopeless and useless political struggle. He vindicated his own con- duot in going to the country for a decision of the question ; and he implored them to let the matter stand on the footing indicated by the resolution, and not ueopen the question by endeavouring to make gentlemen retract their opinions. What would the friends of Sir Robert. Peel have said in 1836, if they bad been called upon to pronounce that the Reform Bill was a "wise, just, and beneficial measure " ; and that if they refused to stultify the House they were to be charged with a reactionary policy, and with an attempt to overturn the existing state of things ? Such a course is neither consistent
with the usual generosity of opponents nor conducive to the firm establish- ment of a policy. He cordially concurred in the resolution moved by Lord Clauriearde, and without the slightest reservation.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE considered himself bound by the arrange- ment entered into on the previous Thursday, and counselled Lord Beau- mont to withdraw his motion. At the same time that he thought the re- solution drawn up by Lord Derby fell far short of that extent of opinion which the magnitude of the occasion demanded, he would not ask for a fuller adhesion. Ministers asked to be permitted to forgo the fetters with which they were hereafter to be hound; and all the House had to do was to take care that those fetters were of well-tempered metal. He
had no apprehension of the future. The vessel of the state was forced to
1:sweet/towards a liberal policy, for public opinion held the rudder. The policy which had been first laid down by the memorable protest of Lord Grenville in1815 would alivays be secure and unchanged. 'If any hesi- tation were shown on the part of that House to carry it out, the sense of the country would spealr out. The House might adopt this motion. In some words he cordially concurred—those deprecating frequent changes in our financial system. After what had occurred " in another place," he felt more strongly than ever how important it was that a vote of the
House of Lords should affirm that there are great evils in financial changes. The country is prosperous—why introduce financial changes ? He would not discuss the Budget; but it does involve very great finan- cial changes ; and it is a grave consideration whether those changes should take place or not.
Lord Lansdowne entirely dissented from the doctrine laid down by Lord Derby that the influx of gold from Australia affected the Free-trade question. If Lord Derby's argument were carried out, it would follow that a diminution of gold would compel Parliament to alter the Corn-laws again Lord DERBY reiterated his opinion. The working classes had been benefited by the influx of gold, which had made the interest of money cheap ; as they had been by emigration and the low price of provisions.
Lord RADNOR suggested, that the House was in a difficulty between the amendment and the resolution, and proposed to adjourn the debate. After setae conversation, the Earl of EARROWEY proposed to leave out the pre- amble of the original resolution, and simply declare that the House ad- hered to the recent commercial policy, and that they would do nothing to impede it. Lord STRANEFORD regretted the want of a Lord Palmerston in that House, to mediate between the rival resolutions. The Duke of NEWCASTLE concurred with Lord Aberdeen, and advised Lord Clanricarde to agree to the emendation suggested by Lord Har- rowby. ("Hear ! " frees lord Derby.) Having said this, the Duke re- plied to some observations made by Lord Derby about Sir Robert Peel. Whatever might be the duty of his followers in the opinion of Lord Derby, as mediators or pacificatory, they held that the protection of our com- mercial policy devolved on them as a legacy from that illustrious man. There was no parallel between the case of the present Government and that of Sir Robert Peel in 1835. Sir Robert had not from the passing of the Reform Bill up to his accession to office brought forward motions or agitated for the repeal of the Iteforin Act ; or told his friends, that, at the proper time, he would give the words, "Up, Guards, and at '-em." In the first Reformed Parliament, Sir Robert Feel deolared that he accepted the Reform Act as the irrevocable settlement of a great question. Lord Derby had ventured on delicate and dangerous ground when be pointed out noble Lords who had changed their opinions, and implied, in an al- lusion, that there had been some dereliction of duty in Sir Robert Peel and his friends when they changed theirs. But that change had been openly avowed and never denied. The charge against Lord Derby was, not that ho had, but that ho had not changed his opinions. The House of Lords had not swerved from the course of Free-trade for the last ten years : so far a resolution was unnecessary ; and he was satisfied that the cause of Free-trade is perfectly safe, because it is based on the immutable grounds of justice. The amendment proposed by Lord HARROWDY was adopted, and the resolution thus altered was agreed to ; Lord CLANRICARDE stipulating that it should be entered on the journals as having passed nemine dissen- tienee. It accordingly stands in these words-
" That this House adheres to the commercial system recently established, and would view with regret any renewed attempt to disturb its operation, or impede its future course."
THE NEW INCOME-TAN.
When the report of the Committee of Supply was brought up on Mon- day, Mr. GLarcrrorre raised a discussion respecting the changes in the In- come-tax proposed in the new Budget. He drew the attention of the House to the course of proceeding pro- posed by Mr. Disraeli. Friday was set apart for the consideration of •the House-tax and the Tea-duties ; while the consideration of the Income- tax stood over until after the recess. Now that is by no means a regular, an advantageous, or he might almost venture to say, a constitutional mode of proceeding.
- We are going to make provision for the financial year beginning on the 6th Of April next year. On that day the present Income-tax ceases ; yet from the Income-tax we derive one-tenth of our revenue, and on its continuance, not on the House-tax, the provision for the ensuing year depends. Whether the Reuse-tax will be required, will depend on what is done with the Income- tax; the Hou.se,tax 'is a question posterior in order. That is the general ground of objection. There are special grounds of tenfold force. The Rouse is not asked to decide upon a simple continuance of the ten but on its recon- struction. He and others entertained insuperable objections to that recon- struction. It is proposed to extend the tax to Ireland ; but on that point he would not enter. Then it is proposed to remove exemptions, and to vary the rate. That, at first sight, seemed a popular proposal ; but a ground of fen- damental difference is opened among those who entertain opinions opposite to Mr. Disraeli's, of a nature so formidable, that from first to last they must offer the proposal the most strenuous opposition. His ground of objection to this Income-tax proposal was that it involves a breaking of the public faith to the national creditor. [Here Mr. Gladstone quoted a passage from a speech of Mr. Pitt in 1798, to the effect that no distend tax should be laid on the stockholder ; although in levying a tax upon all income the stock- holder necessarily paid his share.] Mr. Pitt took no cognizance of the quality of income : his was a personal tax on individuals in respect of their income ; Mr. Disraeli's plan went direct to quality—to the source of the in- come, to its nature and permanence ; a principle fundamentally opposed to that of Mr. Pitt, to the words of the act of 1801, and to the practice of the statesmen of two generations. It would be no answer to say that-Mr. Pitt's Income-tax had already broken faith with the public creditor: it hod not. Those who lent the money perfectly understood that they were exempt from special taxes only. Mr. Gladstone wished particularly to point out, that if
the proposal be agreed to, as a trumpery affair of 7d and them who now concur in it may find these sums doubled or trebled under the pressure of public necessities. Mr. Hume disagreed with the views of Mr. Gladstone, and hoped wo had got beyond the financial views of Mr. Pitt. The Income-tax ought to be paid by every one according to his means. But he thought it ought to be disposed of before the House-tax.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER intimated, that if he were not in order, on Friday, the Speaker would set him right. As to the extension of the Income-tax to Ireland, he was prepared to enter into that 'rea- d= at the proper time. Ministers believed that there would be no breach whatever of the agreement of the public creditor in' the proposed recon- struction. He wished to obtain the verdict of the House upon the whole of _his financial scheme • and he certainly thought that Lora John Rus- sell desired that a distinct issue should be raised on Friday. - Lord Joust RUSSELL denied that he had suggested anything -of the kind. Many of the propositions were new to him, and all he wanted to know was what course of proceeding the Government proposed to adopt. First on Friday night stand the House-duty and the Tea-duties : he thought the Income-tax should come first. There would be great danger in any alteration of the principle of the Income-tax, as it had been established by successive Parliaments. It is not possible to get the principle "that direct taxation ought not to be grounded on exemptions" applied to law. Ho criticised the extension of the tax downwards, and the proposed alteration of the charge upon the incomes of tenant-farmers. The new tor would stead upon a greater number of exemptions than the existing tax. "After what I heard on Friday night," Lord John added, " I conceive that the safety of the financial system of this country is in, great peril." ("Hear, hear !" from the Opposition, and some cries of "Oh ! ' from the Ministerial aide.)
Mr. Gems-cam concurred entirely with Mr. Gladstoue. He presumed Mr. Disraeli would propose on Friday to go into Cfoutntittee of Ways and Means, and would give precedence to one of the taxes—either to the Income-tax or the House-tax.
The CHANCELLOR of theExtnanima—" I shall propose to go into Committee on the Acts."
Sir CHARLES Wool) agreed with Mr. Goulburn, 'that a 001ETEittee of Ways and Means would be necessary to consider the doubling of the House-tax. He concurred with the views of Lord John llama ; and suggested that the Budget should be considered" as a whole, in discussing either the House-tax or the Income-tax in a Committee of Ways and Means.
Mr. WALPOLE explained, that such resolutions would be brought before the House as would raise the whole question of the financial policy of the Government. The Income-tax must be discussed and decided before any remission of taxation takes place. Sir JOHN SHELLEY, Lord JOHN MANNERS, Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT, Mr. E. DENISON, Sir HENRY WILLOUGHBY, and Mr. JOHN MACGREGOR, briefly made similar remarks ; and the report was agreed to.
NATIONAL DEFENCES : ESTIMATES.
In Committee of Supply on Monday, Mr. STAFFORD moved that 6500 additional men should be employed in the sea service to the 31st of March 1853 ; and subsequently for 100,0001. to defray the expenses of steam-machinery. A Channel fleet and a screw-fleet had to be establish- ed. Great satisfaction was given by the screw, and it was now a neces- sity. A ninety-gun screw-ship cost 151,8001. ; a ninety-gun sailing-ship 108,3001. ; the annual expense of the screw-ship was 51,6751., and of the sailing ship 44,3551. It would be seen from the Estimates that Govern- ment had not been insensible to the necessity of retrenchment in the dock- yards. Of the men to be raised, only 2500 will be raised in the first two months. He did not think there would be any great difficulty in getting sailors to man the Navy ; yet he must say, that at present the British sailor is the most precious article in the mar- ket. The comforts of the sailor must be attended to. As to the practice of turning well-trained crews adrift, Government did not propose to interfere with the liberties of the men ; they would have full liberty to choose their own ship. They proposed to have three frigates and five steamers at the Nore ; four sail of the line and five large steamers at Plymouth ; and five sail of the line, two frigates, and six large steamers, at Portsmouth. He could not be more communicative. Government did not desire to interfere in the internal policy of any other country • it was only wished to render the poorest subject in this realm secure. Under the circumstances, it had been adjudged best not to enter minutely into particulars; and Government asked for the vote, not as one of confidence in the Ministry, but as one of confidence in the Executive, whoever might be the Ministers for the time, and who could best judge how far the intelligence on which they acted might be communicated.
Various objections were taken. Mr. Hums complained that a vote for
a screw-fleet should be needed,. after such a large expenditure on steam- vessels already. Why not bring home ships wandesing on the ocean ; and why keep up such abuses as the number of 150 Admirals ? Lord Joss/ RUSSELL gave the Ministerial proposal his " warm assent." Mr. W. WILLIAMS thought our defences were put upon a footing of unques- tionable safety. Sir GEORGE PECHELL pointed out some of the sailors' grievances ; especially, the limitation of the grog, and the being sent from ship to ship. Petty officers ought to be considered worth pensions. Tea and sugar in the Navy were at an unsatisfactory price. As to punish- ments, they were pretty well guarded : harshness was now discouraged. Captain SCOSELL, Mr. CORRY, Sir F. T. BARING, and Mr. SYDNEY HERBERT concurred heartily in both votes. They were passed ; as well as votes of 73,9711. for the wages, and 37,9291. for the victualling of the additional seamen, and 12001. for medicine.
On the motion of Colonel Durum, after a very brief conversation, the House voted the Ordnance Estimates,-92,6581. for an increase of 2000 men and 1000 horses for the Artillery service; for iron guns, forage, and additional labour in making up ammunition.
SCIENCE AND ART AT KENSINGTON GORE.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved for a vote of 150,0001. for the purchase of land at Kensington. In proposing this vote, Mr. DISP.A.ELI delivered a short essay on the theme that the time is now come when the influence of art and science must be brought to bear upon production. We can maintain our manu- facturing supremacy no longer merely by our great command over raw material. The intellectual element is becoming one of the most important elements of competition. It attracted the attention of the Royal Com- missioners, and they had considered the question from that point of view. They observed that there was a great number of institutions in the Me- tropolis, but they were scattered about ; and many from want of space could not satisfactorily develop their objects as institutions. The Com- missioners had therefore felt that some effort must be made to concentrate these scattered energies for the great object of industrial education, by establishing one systematic arrangement. With this view, they had pur- chased a considerable portion of land with the surplus fund of the Great Exhibition and they appealed to the State to contribute a like sum. Part of the land purchased is intended for the erection of a National Gal- lery; and another part for a Commercial Museum of raw produce, ma- chinery, and manufactures. For this he asked a vote of 150,0001. Lord SEYMOUR raised some objections. The learned societies would not consent to be removed to one spot. Kensington is an inconvenient distance from town. The museums spoken of would have to be built with public money. He recommended caution. Lord dons RUSSELL, recapitulating the substance of Mr. Disraeli's statement, thought this was the commencement of a very great improve- ment. Mr. Hums saw difficulties. Why into use the surplus for the purpose of converting Kensington Palace nto an institution like that now proposed ? If the paintings in the National Gallery were taken to Kensington, one in ten of those who visit them now would not visit them there. Mr. DRUMMOND satirized the foolish attempt to excite in the people of this country a taste for high art which Nature has denied them : it was as absurd as trying to make an Italian like beef-steaks and porter. " Only go into your own lobbies and look at your own frescoes, and see what you are capable of achieving." A very miscellaneous conversation followed ; in which it was explained by Mr. DISRAELI, that all the estimates for building would come before the House, and they would have entire control over it ; and that the land purchased would be given to the public. The vote was agreed to.
EXPENSES Or THE STATE FUN. BRILL.
A vote of 80,0001. was asked for the expenses of the funeral of the Duke of Wellington. Some opposition was made, on the ground that no stateme4W-the items had been presented to the House. There was some confusion ; but, indef to Mr. Hums, Mr. G. A. HAMILTON speci-
fied a: few items—Public ks, 25,0001.; Lord Chamberlain and Earl Marital, 33 000/. ; expense of moving troops, 80001. ; in all, not more than 80,01001. The vote was agreed to.
THE Surma COLONIES.
In pursuance of notice, Mr. JAMES WILSON' in moving for papers, called attention to the effects of the Sugar Acts of 1846 and 1848 on the British Sugar Colonies, and the sugar trade at home. As the Chan. cellor of the Exchequer had impugned the legislation of the last four or five years as harsh and unjust to our West Indian Colonies, Mr. Wilson felt bound to persevere with his motion. Last year, a great agitation was set on foot to arrest the descent of the duty. This year, Sir John Pakington gave notice of a motion for a Com- mittee of the whole House on the Sugar-duties : which he withdrew on coming into office ; intimating the intention of Ministers not then to more in the matter, but leaving it for future consideration. After the general election, Ministers had changed their views, and it was important that they should state why. Proceeding from these considerations, Mr. Wilson at once set about vindicating recent legislation by figured statements. For thirty-five years preceding 1846, the home consumption of sugar was nearly stationary ; having only increased 10,000 tons since 1810. But from 1844 to 1852 the quantity consumed rose from 207,000 tons to 382,000 tons. Nor was the largest portion of the foreign sugar slave-grown. For the three years preceding 1846, the average consumption of West Indian sugar amounted to 127,000 tons—the average of the three years following the act of 1846 was 147,000 tons: the average of foreign sugar in the three years before 1846 was 30,000 tons—in the three years following, 48,000 tons. The average consumption of British Colonial sugar, taken in the aggregate, in the last three years of complete protection, was 209,000 tons—in the first three years of diminished protection, 264,000 tons. Comparing the con- sumption of British Colonial sugar in 1842 and in 1851,. he found a balance of 93,000 tons in favour of the latter. The average importation of sugar from the British Colonies had increased 58000 tons since 1846. Nor was it true that the increase was solely attributable to the supply from the East Indies and the Mauritius. The production of sugar had not increased in Jamaica. But of late years, that island had been visited with extraordinary afflictions : cholera had swept off 40,000 labourers; the planters had to send back their East India labourers; and considering these causes of distress, it was remarkable that under five years of unrestricted competition they had kept the ground enjoyed under protection. In fact, the West Indies are now producing annually 20,000 tons more sugar than during the last five years of protection.
Had the act of 1846 encouraged the slave-trade ? The slaves imported into Brazil in 1846 amounted to 50,324—in 1851, to 3287. The importation into Cuba in 1851 was 5000.
Mr. Wilson showed that the consumer had been greatly benefited; that the revenue had recovered within 500,0001. of the amount raised under Protec- tion ; and that the receipts of the planter were larger at the diminished price than with the higher price six years ago. He showed that the cost of pro. duction, in labour and food, had diminished; and contended, that if the West Indian Colonies are not more prosperous than they were before, it is not to be traced to the act of 1846.
With respect to refining sugar in bond, he said the matter had been looked into by the late Government, in connexion with the refiners ; and that when it was found necessary to place the whole system of refining in bond under the surveillance of the Excise, the refiners declined to press Government for en alteration of the law.
Sir JOHN PAXXNGTON, reviewing his whole conduct in respect of this question, was not now disposed to retract anything he had said upon the subject at any time. The figures which marked the sugar-trade of the current year, he ad- mitted, were figures he never expected to see. But he was prepared to join issue with Mr. Wilson on three points. He would maintain that the act of 1846 had encouraged the slave-trade. In the four years preceding 1846, the number of slaves imported into Brazil was 78,832—in the four years follow- ing 1846, the number was 193,172. It was true that in 1851 the number dropped to 3287, and was nil in the present year ; but that arose from the enormous importation of the four previous years. In Cuba, the fours years' importationprevious to 1846 was 22,930—since, it was 15,150. Upon this point, therefore, his anticipation had been borne out. The act of 1846 did give a great stimulus to the slave-trade. That it also gave a stimulus to slave produce, was shown by the fact that in Brazil and Cuba, the two great slave-growing countries, the average exports in the four years before 1846 from both were 4,290,940 cwt., and in the four years ending 1850, they were 6,266,770 cwt., showing an increase of 1,975,830 cwt. His third point was that the Colonies had been injured. On this head he read a variety of extracts from official and other documents, to show what tremendous suffering had been inflicted. British Guiana, according to a publication by Lord Stanley, who described what he saw with his own eyes, was strewn with the ruins of lately-built houses and mills ; and estates worth 170,0001. are now worth only 15,0001. A Jamaica landlord had given up an estate for a debt of less than one-fifth of what the estate cost him- 25,0001. Another, who in 1819 netted 22,0001. profits, has now abandoned his estates. The " lower orders" are daily "putting aside all decency," the " better class appear to have lost all hope." The saleable property in the island has decreased from 11,556,3701. in 1850 to 9,499,7901. in 1851. Sir John had learned to distrust any idea of final settlement in such matters : they must shape their legislation from time to time as the neces- sities of the country might require. He took a comprehensive and retro- spective view of his own conduct, with the purpose of showing that under the fluctuating circumstances of each year he was justified in the course he had taken in Parliament. Reverting to the present state of the matter, he believed that the low im- portation arose partly from the failure of the crops at Porto Rico and Cubs, and partly from the fact that low prices had driven the slave-growing coun- tries into the market of the United States. Jamaica had not only not in- creased but immensely diminished its production of sugar ; but he thought that, seeing the increase in four out of five of the colonies, it was very. much a labour question. The West Indian Colonies still recoure all the assistance the Imperial Government could give them ; especially in supplying labour. Sir Charles Grey, the Governor of Jamaica, who is powerless there, described things as going 4‘ from bad to worse." The cholera had carried off, no doubt, 40,000 persons, which subtracted at least 20,000 from the labour-market. The income was steadily falling below the expenditure ; and the deficit of course accumulating. He could not conceive a state more seriously. depressed than that of Jamaica. Government proposed to send out a Commissioner to inquire and report what changes would improve the condition of the island.
Mr. Hums would never agree to what Sir John Pakington seemed to hint at when he talked of finality, or allow any protective duty to be re- imposed. At the same time, everything ought to be done to assist the colonists and remove the shackles that bind them. Thousands had been ruined by the acts of the Government. He approved of the permission to refine in 'bond. Loans have done no good. The only chance for the West Indies is, that the different properties should fall into the hands of new proprietors, paying a few dollars for that which cost thousands. Sir Joss Pasnscrros explained, that he had not the slightest intention of changing the policy recently adopted towards the Colonies.
Lord STANLEY spoke in an apologetic tone. He said it could not be too clearly un.leratood that Government bad no intention of renewing the differential duty about to expire.
The propose. to send out a Commissioner to Jamaica seemed to be generally approved of. The motion for papers passed as a matter of course.
THE FRENCH Murex.
The proclamation of the Empire in France was announced in both Houses on Monday, to the same effect in each, but with a marked differ- ence in the manner.
In the House of Lords, the Earl of MALMESBURY included the an- nouncement in the following speech.
4, It now becomes my duty to announce to your Lordships an event which you must all long since have expected, but which is not diminished in im- portance though so long expected and foreseen : I allude to the notification that has been made to her Majesty's Government by the Secretary for Fo- reign Affairs at Paris, announcing that the French people have determined to change their constitution from a Republic to that of an Empire, and to attach to the person of the Prince President of the Republic the dignity of Emperor. That notification was made to me on Thursday last ; and, having been com- municated by me to her Majesty's Government, her Majesty's servants have thought it right, without further hesitation, to advise her Majesty cordially to accept and recognize this new constitution selected by the French people for their own government.
" It has been, as your Lordships all know, our usual policy for a period of
twenty-two years—since the Revolution of 1830 in Paris—to acknowledge the constitutional doctrine that the people of every country have the right to choose their own sovereign without any foreign interference ; and that a so- vereign having been freely chosen by them, that sovereign, or ruler, or what- ever he may be called, being de facto the ruler of that country, should be re- cognized by the sovereign of this. If there has been formerly any doubt as to the distinct will of the French nation in respect to the choice of their sovereign—if there has been any doubt as to their distinct intention at any former time, I must say that, on this occasion at least, it is perfectly im- possible to mistake their undoubted determination, three times in a most solemn way expressed with respect to the same person, in the most public manner that history can afford an example of. W hen the Revo- lution and the Republic succeeded to the Monarchy of Louis Philippe, the present Emperor of the French was residing in this country. He went over ith none of the usual canvass that takes place at elections of minor im- portance, or even at those of equal magnitude. He went over, I may say, with nothing but a name,—a name so great in France that it evidently is invested with a magic which has an effect that experience only has been able to make Europe understand. We could, indeed, almost comprehend that the fate of Napoleon, checkered as it was with such a mixture of immense glory and misfortune, was admirably calculated to rouse all the sympathies of human nature ; and therefore we cannot wonder that he made a lasting impression on a people over whom he ruled so long and so greatly. But it is hardly possible for any person in a European state out of France to suppose that the prestige of that name remains so long, and so steadily and strongly, for thirty-seven years after his abdication, that his nephew should have ap- peared in three different characters before the French people in the course of four years,—first offering himself, without any of the accessories of a court or a government to assist him, as simple President of the French Republic, with a Chamber -, secondly, as absolute President of the Republic without any constitutional form of government; and thirdly, as Emperor of the same people ; and to be elected, first by 6,000,000, then by 7,000,000, and lastly confirmed in his power by nearly 8,000,000 of people, forming the almost entire adult male population of France. This is not the time to speculate on the reason of such an extraordinary exhibition of sentiment and con- viction on the part of the French people; but I think, if we have long lost sight of the power of that name in France, it has been because we have not sufficiently observed that up to this moment, in the changes that have taken place in that country, only one part of her population was consulted and considered. Is was at Paris that all these changes were carried out. It was in Paris alone that the fate of Charles the Tenth and Louis Philippe was determined ; it was by the voice of the Parisians alone that the Republic was established in 1848 ; and, though both forms of govern- ment successively met with the silent approbation of the country, yet on no one occasion, till the President of the Republic was elected in 1848, were the whole body, the mass of the French people, consulted as to what form of go- vernment they preferred, or what manner of man they ought to have. Among the masses of the Frenchpeople one recollection, and one only, seems strongly and steadily to have prevailed ; and I think it is not difficult to explain why it should have been so. In 1816, at the time of the Restoration, the army of France, an enormous army, was disbanded : it was poured back again upon the hearths of the population ; the prisoners returned from all parts of the world in thousands and tens of thousands ; and it is not exaggerating the number to say that 400,000 or 500,000 men, with one fixed idea in their minds, with one worship fixed in their hearts, returned to their homes. For twenty or thirty years afterwards they talked of but one man • that one man was the great idol of their imagination ; and, though they could hardly have exaggerated his military merits and glory, they still attributed to him all that enthusiasm could give. Upon the rising generation all this was not likely to be lost; and it appears to me that the seeds these men have sown throughout the provinces of France are now to be seen in the fruit which has ripened on this occasion into an empire. "Seeing this immense demonstration of feeling on the part of the French people, it was impossible for her Majesty's Government, even if it had not been the usual policy, not to advise her Majesty immediately and cordially to accept and recognize the Empire. There might have been one, and only one reason, which might have tempted us to hesitate so to advise her Majesty ; but I rejoice to say that the good sense of the present Emperor, foreseeing the difficulty, made an advance to remove from the Government those diffi- culties that otherwise might have existed. I allude to a somewhat ambigu- ous expression to be found in the report of the Senatus-conaulte, which re- ferred to the late President of the Republic, and which was connected with the title he meant to take—that of 'Napoleon This might have in- duced her Majesty's Government—it would indeed naturally have induced any one to suppose, as understood in common parlance, and as it is commonly understood when designating. sovereigns—to give the bearer of the title an hereditary and retrospective right to the throne ; that he was descended in a straight and legitimate line, and that by right he now mounted the throne of France. The present Emperor, however, foreseeing this difficulty, took him- self the initiatory step, and frankly assured her Majesty's Government that it related simply to the historical incident that in France, and according to French law, two sovereigns of the name of Napoleon Bonaparte had preceded the present Emperor. Neither of these was recognized by this country. The French Government knew that as well as your Lordships, and they have adopted the title without any intention of claiming hereditary right from the first Emperor. They have distinctly intimated this to her Majesty's Government, and it has also been since announced in a speech by the }:mpe- ror himself. They have declared, and he has himself declared, that he is the sovereign only by the voice of the people, not by hereditary right to the
throne i that he distinctly recognizes all the Governments that have existed since 1814 in France ; that he recognizes the acts of those Governments ; and that he acknowledges the solidarity of his Government as succeeding the others. With these satisfactory and frank explanations, made before we asked any official questions on the subject—with these satisfactory and frank declarations, it was only left to her Majesty's Government cordially to acknowledge the decided will of the French nation, and to send to our Am- bassador at Paris credentials for the new Court. In the notification of the Empire, her Majesty's Government is informed that the same policy that influenced the President will influence the Emperor. And with respect to that policy as regards England, it is impossible to speak too highly of the cordial and frank manner in which every question has been entertained by the Government of France since I have had the honour of bolding the seals of office ; and I am sure my noble friend opposite will be ready to say the same thing. I have found nothing but fairness and fair play in all their transactions. I have found nothing but assurances of good-will, and wishes to maintain an unbroken friendship
with this country. I believe that the Emperor himself and the great mass of the French people deeply feel the necessity, for the interests of both countries, that they should be at peace. I believe, on the other hand, that they see the folly and the crime of provoking war. They must know that war, so far as carried on for the subjugation of either country by the other, is an absurdity ; that the one can never be so powerful or so independent as to be able to subjugate the other ; and that, therefore, the war must be only a useless war—useless as cruel, and cruel as useless."
Viscount CANNING suggested that the matterjust announced to the House was one that should be touched upon as lightly as possible. Since the noble Earl had given to their Lordships a statement of the trans- actions that had occurred in France, and since he had informed them of the result of that statement, he had to ask his noble friend to add to that state- ment on one point on which it was not unreasonable they should ask for further information,—he meant, the form and shape in which the assurances as to the disposition of the Government of France had been placed in the hands of Ministers. Would his noble friend state the form and shape of those assurances; and whether their form would enable him, either now or at any future but not distant time, to lay them before Parliament ? The Earl of MALMESBURY did not exactly understand Lord Canning ; who appeared to disapprove of something he had stated. Viscount CANNING said, he had only expressed what was an opinion over and over again repeated in that and the other House of Parliament, that in the course of their discussions on foreign matters, it was advisable, and above all in a Minister of the Crown, to abstain irom anything ap- proaching to a comment on the conduct of a neighbouring people. As to the question he had to ask, he would shortly explain what he meant. His noble friend was aware that communications between foreign states as- sumed, according to their importance, different forms. Sometimes they were made in the form of a despatch from an ambassador ; sometimes in the form of a note from the minister of the country which tendered the in- formation, or from the ambassador of that country at that court to which the information was given. Now, he wished to know in which of these forms the assurances had been received by Government ? The Earl of MALHESEURY wished to say, that he had made no uhfair comments, and he thought that he had not excited the slightest disagree- able feeling : he could not understand, therefore, how Lord Canning should find fault with his comments.
In answer to his question, he had to say that the explanations given rela- tive to the title of Napoleon were perfectly official, and satisfactory to her Majesty's Government. They could not be more satisfactory than when made by the French Ambassador verbally in London, and repeated by the Emperor himself in his speech to the Chambers. The Marquis of BB.EADALBANE hoped that the change which had taken place in France would be attended with good results to the people of that country.
In the House of Commons, Mr. DISRAELI simply stated that Govern- ment had received a notification of the reestablishment of the Empire ; that the Emperor had been proclaimed under the title of Napoleon III ; that he had been formally recognized ; that he did not assert his heredi- tary claim to the Empire, but stated that his only claim to be considered Emperor was that he had been elected by the people of Franco ; and that he had in a voluntary manner declared that ho accepts all the Govern- ments and their acts which have occurred since 1814.
In reply to Lord Joffe RUSSELL, Mr. DISRAELI said, ho did not think there were any objections to the production of the despatch conveying the information ; but he was sure Lord John would not press for an an- swer at that-moment.
THE IRISH TENURE BILLS.
When Mr. NAPIER moved the second reading of his Tenant Compensa- tion Bill, Mr. Sergeant SHER made a speech of enormous length, upon the evils which for centuries have sprung from the state of the law of tenure in Ireland. He also smartly criticized the provisions of the Tenant Compensation Bill under consideration ; alleging that it swept away the whole of the Ulster tenant-right, under the clause fixing the amount of compensation at not more than four clear years' annual value of the lands improved, after deducting rent. [Mr. NAPIER said, that was a printer's error : the rent should bo included. The compensation given by the bill was a legal fiction ; for the lap lord might raise tbo rent during the tenancy, in consequence of the improvement : and if the land- lord kept up the rent on account of the tenant's improvements, he would if he left the farm, leave all his improvements behind, a confiscation to the landlords. The forms which, under the bill, a tenant must go through before he could make any improvement are very complex ; and unless he went through those forms he could get no compensation. Mr. Shee sug- gested that his own bill and the Government bill should be referred to a Select Committee.
Mr. Ross Moons approved of the Government measure ; and attacked that of Mr. Sergeant Shee, as violating the rights of property. What ho called the Ulster tenant-right is a varying custom, which is not the same on two estates, and which is incapable of a definition. If the forms pre- scribed in Mr. Napier's bill were complicated, the forms of Mr. Craw- ford's bill were the most cumbrous and complicated ever brought before the House.
Mr. BALL thought the measure before them failed to meet the just claims of the tenantry of Ireland. The bill was entirely useless for the small holders—for there are still 421,000 tenants holding less than thirty acres of land ; and the 150,000 tenants who held a larger portion of land would not be able to avail themselves of its provisions, even if it afforded security for outlay, which it did not. He hoped the suggestion of Mr. Sergeant Shee would be adopted.
Here Mr. BROTHERTON reminded the House that it was past twelve; and he must move that the debate be now adjearued. Mr. BACHE asked whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer would fix an early day for the continuation of the discussion ? The CamiCEI.I.OR of the Excascarna replied, that he had no day at his command : he bad done all he could to facilitate the discussion that night. Upon the motion for adjournment, the discussion was continued by Mr. AFMAHON and Mr. Lucas; the for- mer crieiciaing the Government measure; and the latter complaining that no explanations of what the bill really meant had been given by Ministers.
The House divided on the motion for adjournment; which was carried by 92 to 51.
"Mr. WALPOLE then signified that Government did not object to refer- ring the rival bills to a Select Committee ; and it was ultimately agreed that all the bills—the Tenant's Compensation, the Land Improvement, the Leasing Powers, the Landlord and Tenant, and the Tenant Right Bills—should be so referred.
Subsequently, a discussion on a personal matter took place. Mr. %moon
accused Mr. Napier of supplying himself with ideas from the pigeon-holes of Dublin Castle ; and of having taken his bill, almost section by section, from a pamphlet written by Mr. Tighe Hamilton, formerly Assistant Secretary at Dublin Castle, and dated at Nice on the 2d of last month. Mr. Neriaa most distinctly denied that he had ever seen the pamphlet of Mr. Tighe Hamilton, or any bill or paper relating to it. He retorted the charge upon Mr. Tighe Hamilton of having taken without aolmowledg- ment a great ;portion of a book of which he furnished the materials, and which was written at his request by Mr. Vance and Mr. Ferguson. After that statement, he trusted he should stand in the House, as it had always been his pride and privilege to stand, as a gentleman whose word and honour were unimpeaehed.
Mr. F. Owavmna and Mr. OSBORNE referred the infusion of bitterness
into the debate to Mr. Whiteside's remarks on a former evening. Mr. Wurresme averred that they had found no bills in the pigeon-holes of Dublin Castle ; and that the present bills had been framed by 'Mr. Fer- guson, under the superintendence of himself and Mr. Napier. Here the matter ended.
CHARTERED COMPANIES AND Libman Lramnrrv.
A short discussion arose on the question of limited liability in joint- stock enterprises, on the occasion of a motion by Mr. BROWN for copies of all applications for a charter made by the London, Liverpool, and North American Screw Steam-ship Company to the Board of Trade, and in general for copies of all correspondence on the subject. The company, it appears, has applied for a chartered limitation of the liability of their shareholders. This Mr. Brown, and those on whose behalf ho spoke, consider a direct interference with private enterprise, and a viola- tion of the principle of unrestricted competition. Government ought not to grant privileges to one class which are not enjoyed by all. Joint-stock companies with limited liability would interfere with the commercial credit of the country. Mr. HENLEY complained that Mr. Brown had brought forward this motion While the charter was sub judice. He had admitted that there might be exceptional cases in which it would be right to grant charters, but he'had omitted to state the exceptional character of the present case —the company's proposal to open steam-communication with Canada. He declined to produce the papers. Mr. CLAY, who seconded the motion, followed up the argument of Mr. 13rown, that to grant a charter with limited liability would violate the principle of unrestricted competition. If there has been hitherto no steam-communication with Canada, that is because it was• not profitable. He was strongly of opinion that the power of granting charters should revert to Parliament, now that the principle of unrestricted competition is generally acknowledged. The logical result of the system of granting charters with limited liability would be the adoption of the French sys- tem of partnerships "en commandite" ; which he for one was not pre- pared to adopt.
Mr. Lows objected to the discussion of a question on its merits not yet decided by the specific department appointed to decide it. He could not sit still, however, and hear Mr. Brown call upon the House to take •mea- sures based on the principle of unrestricted competition, which would have the effeot of eliminating from the field of common exertions formida- ble and new competitor.
The law of unlimited liability is a restraint on competition. That law en- courages the competition of capital—under the penalty of prxranuire. would be wise to sweep away all those laws which tend to restrain, embar- rass, and hinder the competition of capital in different trades and employ- ments. It is said that limited liability would injure credit : well, if-persons prefer the credit attached to unlimited liability, they may do so; that is their affair. But what has been done with advantage in the United' States of America ought to be done here also. He trusted that the day is not far distant when Parliament will relieve the Board of Trade from the invidious and annoying duty oast upon it, not by taking away the, wer, which had been so beneficial, of permitting large-associations with limited liability, but by leaving it to every set of persons who wish to associate their capital for a common enterprise to do so without having occasion to go to the Government at all, or spend one shilling in fees or stumps, merely (as in America) by making known to the public the amount of capital they put into the con- cern, ao that the public may be aware-with what they deal. (Cheers.) Mr. BROTHERTON thought that what could be accomplished by private enterprise should not be the subject of a charter. Lord GODERICH thought there should be in this case the same freedom of -trade as in others. As it seemed to be, generally, the opinion of the House that the motion should be withdrawn, Mr. BROWN accordingly withdrew it.
NEWSPAPER STAMP-DUTY.
Leave has been given to the ATTORNEY-GENERAL to bring in a bill to amend the law relating to the fltamp-duty on Newspapers. The main object of the bill was so to amend-the definition of a newspaper as to exclude from the operation of the Stamp-duties publications published at intervals of not less than twenty-six days; so that litigation might be prevented, and the law be brought clearly in accordance with the decision of 'the ma- jority of the Judges in the Court of Exchequer. DISTRIBUTION OF PABAJAMENTARY PAPERS.
Mr. TUFNELL moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the expe- diency of distributing, gratis, a selection of the reports and returns printed by the order of the House of Commons, among the literary and scientific institutions and mechanics institutions throughout the kingdom. Government did not offer any oppoeltion. Mr. HEA.DLAM suggested that the Committee should be directed to ascertain how far Parliamentary papers could be more effectually distributed to the general public. The motion was agreed to with these additional words.
SaLsor Comturreim.
On. the motion of Lord GRANVILLE, the House of lords agreed to the 'following resolution, on Tuesday— "That in the event of a division taking place in any Said Committee, the question proposed, the name of the Lord proposing the question, and the respective votes thereupon of each Lord present, be entered on the minutes of evidence, or on the minutes of the proceedings of the Committee, (as the -case may be,) and reported to the House on the report of such Committee."
Lord rtioartiDALE objected to the resolution, but did not divide the House.
NEW MEMBERS.
Five new Members have taken the oaths and-their seats-this-week : on Monday, Lord Norreys for Abingdon, Mr. W. J. Pox' for Oldham, Lord Adolphus Vane for Durham ; on Tuesday, Mr. G. H. Whalley for Peter- borough ; on Wednesday, Mr. S. P. Oakes for Bury St. Edmunds.
Previous page
