NEWS OF THE WEEK.
PARLIAMENT moves with accelerated speed as it nears the goal of its labours. During the week, there has not been much said, but PARLIAMENT moves with accelerated speed as it nears the goal of its labours. During the week, there has not been much said, but thiere has been much done. Who, amidst the toil and trouble that beset the English and Scotch Reform Bills, even after the seces- sion of the Grand Duke and his friends, could have anticipated that the second reading of the Irish Bill, its passage through the Lords' Committee, and the Report, would occupy but three little nights? Yet so it has been. On Monday, the principle, and on Thursday the details were discussed ; last night the Report was received; on Monday comes the third reading ; on Wednesday, Thursday the details were discussed ; last night the Report was received; on Monday comes the third reading ; on Wednesday, we'stippose, it will be law. The Scotch Anti-Reformers showed no small "pluck," hopeless as their case unquestionably was ; the English stood up to be knocked down, which was all that was to be expected of them ; *while the Irish, with all their boasting, have been beaten without even a show of fight. We must except the Duke of WELLINGTON: he did indeed cast .discredit on the one great political act of his life, in a feeble attempt to check the pro- gress of a yet greater and better—but such a "darkening of counsel with words without knowledge!" The Irish Tithes Bill has at length got through Committee. Members still cry out most vociferously against the measure, but their number is small though noisy. The question has never, perhaps, been fairly placed before the public. There are two ob- jections to Irish tithes,—one local, another general. The tax is disliked in Ireland because it goes to pay a church that is disliked ; it is opposed by many, both in Ireland and England, because from its nature, and the mode of levying it, agricultural improvements are discouraged, and agricultural tenants exposed to much op- pression. Mr. STANLEY s plan does not obviate the local, but it certainly aims at removing the general objection. O'CONNELL would pay the Protestant clergy, and quarter the Catholic clergy on the lands of the former, and give the tithes to the landlords. This is _Irish generosity, which feeds the sated and sends the hungry empty tiway. The abolition of tithes in Ireland and in England may be fairly advocated ; but if abolished, it must be for.the-good of the people, not of the landed gentlemen. 'Lord ALTHORP brought forward his financial statement last night. A Chancellor of the Exchequer on such occasions, like the frugal housewife in Scripture, brings forth for the most part "things new and old." Lord ALTHORP has nothing new to bring forth, nor is the old very consolatory.
The Income of 1830, ending the 5th January 1831, was 50,056,616l.; and the Expenditure was 47,142,943/. • leaving a surplus of 2,913,673/. The net Income of 1831 was 4424,4401. • and the Expenditure of 1831 was 47,125,2971.;. leaving a deficiency of 69457/. The Income for the year ended 5th April 1832, was 46,293,521!.; the Expen- diture, 47,559,708!.; leaving a deficiency of 1,263,187/. The calculated Receipts of the current year are 46,470,000/. • and the actual Estimates are 45,698,376/. ; the surplus on the 5th April 1833 will thus be 773,624/.
There is therefore in the two years a deficiency of nearly 500,000/. The causes to which the falling off,is attributed are the political excitement, the cholera, certain operations of the Bank by which the currency has been seriously affected. Neither Lord ALTHORP nor any of those who followed him notice—THE OPPRESSIVE AMOUNT OF THE TAXATION ITSELF. This, we Sus- pect, has done more to cripple commerce and manufactures, and by consequence to reduce the revenue, than all the others. The Ministers do not despair of the energies of the country; nor is it reasonable they should,—else Why retain office? The Opposition do not despair of its energies • nor is it reasonable they should,—else why desire office? 174 as little despair as either, because we look forward to the speedy possession of a Par- liament which will go to the bottom of our financial sores, how- ever carefully they may be plastered over by either party.' Sir HENRY PARNELL'S observations on the advantages to be derived from a general consolidation.of offices, are important, and will, we hope, 'be kept in mind during the recess. The speech of Lord ALTHoar has one' virtue for which the speeches of former Chan- cellors of the Exchequer did not use to be distinguished—it is plain to the Meanest capacity.
Two men, who have little in common, but that by their labours they* have rendered themselves obnoxious to the censure of a pretty considerable class of their countrymen, those who live or wish to live by the abuses of the state—Lord BROUGHAM, and the Member for Middlesex—have been this week attacked in a way which bids fair to confer some sorry notoriety on one at least of the assailants, Mr. HUME, having voted with Ministers on the Russian Loan question, has been subjected, for departing from his professions of econemy, to an outpouring of Sir CHARLES WETHERELL'S elo- quence; which was meant to be severe,, but was only abusive. Sir CHARLES has forgotten that "he who spits at the wind spits in his own face." Denunciations of extravagance; from 'one who never interposed to check an abuse however wasteful, are under any circumstances equivocal ; but in the present case, they outrage common decency. Mr. HumE violated no principle of right in voting with Ministers : the neglect of economy involves no moral sacrifice—it is at best a virtue of expediency. He might have deemed the continuance of Ministers in office worth more than 1,800,000/. without imputation of any error but an error of calcu- lation. We say nothing of the impudence of the charge, coming from men who by their vote neither meant nor pretended to save the nation one farthing, but whose sole objection to the disburse- ment was that they had not the making of it.
Mr. HUME was attacked for countenancing extravagance; and Lord BROUGHAM. by parity of reason, for patronizing sinecures ! The dog that bayed the moon was a sensible cur—he objected to her brightness such notable assailants as Sir CHARLES WETHERELL and Sir EDWARD SUGDEN would have objected to her constancy. If Sir EDWARD have taken nothing else, he has at least taken a, title by his motion. Were he to live for a thousand years, the name of that little, loathsome insect, which is so potent in its offensive- ness, that people fear even to crush it, because of the odour it leaves behind, will stick to him more closely than either gown or wig. So much for letting his tongue run idly riot on the Chan- cellor. . . The subject, which had h been bandied between the two Houses on Wednesday and Thursday, was recurred to last night in the Commons. The ex-Solicitor-General is a very vain, and what is not usual with vain persons, a very ill-natured little man. He - has for the last two years been busied in almost daily attacks on Lord BROUGHAM, in Court and in Parliament. His waspishness had a very apparent motive, and was borne on that account with singular temper by its noble object. But the meekest of the meekest may at length be wearied out. The attack, by Sir EDWARD, on Wednesday,—which was made with an eagerness that nothing but paltry personal hatred could supply, filled full the - cup of his offences. The interchange of such compliments as he and Lord BROUGHAM have bestowed on each other, is not highly contributive, to the dignity of either House; but the common sense of the public will not forget, though Sir EDWARD SUGDEN and his claqueurs may, where the provocation originated.
