Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

ants of the United Kingdom. Lord J. Russell in reply rested his case on the universal law throughout Europe which prohibited the erection of ecclesiastical sees without the sanction of the State; his conduct now might not be consistent with former professions, but his confidence in the good feeling of the Holy See had been misplaced; the act of the Pope was an insult to this country, and ought not to be submitted to. After a few remarks from Mr. Moore, Mr. Fagan, and Mr. Lawless, the House stood adjourned by the clock striking six.

Feb.

13.

(LORDS.) Lord Campbell brought in a Bill, which was read a first time, to amend the Criminal Law providing that if a prisoner indicted for felony be acquitted of the felony, he may be found guilty of misdemeanour if the evidence warrants such a conclusion. Lord Brougham withdrew his County Courts Extension Bill and substituted an amended Bill, which was read a first time.

(COMMONS.) The adjourned debate on Mr. D'Israeli's motion was resumed by the Marquess of Granby, who dwelt upon the depreciation in the value of agricultural property-a result which he attributed to free trade-and laboured to show from emigration and pauperism returns that agricultural labourers were as badly off as the farmers. Sir J. Graham dissected the arguments of the Protectionists, examining in detail the various remedies and suggestions of Mr. D'Israeli, and laboured to prove their injustice or inutility; inferred that the real object of the motion was to turn out Ministers, dissolve Parliament, and re-impose the corn taxes; and concluded with an eloquent allusion to the late Sir Robert Peel, adding that he gave 66 an unhesitating vote against this proposition." Mr. Booker, Mr. Cayley, Col. Dunne, Lord Jocelyn, and Mr. B. Cochrane having spoken in support of the motion, and Mr. Labouchere and Mr. Cardwell against it, Mr. Cobden said the object of the motion was protection; protested against compensation upon any assumption of an understanding that corn should be kept at some certain price-there had been no such understanding; the motion contemplated a transfer of five or six millions of taxes from the shoulders of the farmers to those of others; such a transfer was impracticable; the way to relieve the farmers was by reducing the expenditure; protection was a worn-out principle, and now a fresh device of misty meaning was started, instead of letting landlords and farmers adjust their affairs among themselves; the honourable member concluded by warning the Opposition against disturbing this great question, against entering upon a career of hostility to the interests of the mass of the people, the great bulk of whom had no representatives in that house. Mr. Moore would support the motion, because it held out a hope of remedial measures for Ireland, and because, as an Irish member, he would tolerate this ministry only while they showed themselves friends of civil and religious liberty. Lord J. Russell examined Mr. D'Israeli's arguments; generally took the same line of reply as had been taken by Sir G. Graham; and concluded by asking the House "in the name of the great interests of the country, in the name of the whole mass of the people, not to consent to this motion." Mr. D'Israeli, in an able reply, argued that the motion, which was one for simple inquiry, was but a logical sequence of the speech from the Throne; and again urging the claims of the agriculturists to consideration, appealed to honourable members not to be daunted in doing their duty. After a few remarks from Mr. Muntz and Mr. Greenall in support of the motion, the House divided-for the motion 267, against it 281. Sir W. Clay brought in a Compound Householders Franchise Bill.

[ocr errors][merged small]

(LORDS.) An interesting conversation took place between Lords Monteagle, Stanley, and Grey, on the subject of Railways in British North America.

(COMMONS.) The adjourned debate on Lord J. Russell's motion was brought to a close. The speakers against the motion were Mr. Fagan, Mr. F. Peel, Mr. B. Wall, Mr. Sadleir, Mr. M. Gibson, Mr. Scully, Mr. F. O'Connor, and Mr. Scholefield; Sir J. Duke, Mr. G. A. Hamilton, Mr. C. Bruce, Mr. F. Maule, Col. Sibthorp, Mr. Muntz, and Mr. Brotherton, supported the motion. On a division, the motion for leave to bring in the Bill was carried by 395 against 63. The Bill was brought in by the AttorneyGeneral and read a first time. Leave was given to Mr. Keogh to bring in a Bill to improve the Irish Prerogative Court.

(COMMONS.) In a Committee of Ways and Means the Chan

The

Feb. cellor of the Exchequer made his financial statement. 17. income for the year ending next April 5 might be estimated at 52,656,000.; the outlay would be about 50,134,9007., giving a surplus on the year's account of 2,521,000. Reckoning the customs at 20,400,000l., the excise at 14,000,000l., stamps at 6,310,000%., assessed taxes at 4,348,000l., property-tax at 5,380,000l., Post-office at 830,0007., and miscellaneous at 872,000l., the total income of the year ending April 5, 1852, would amount to 52,140,000.; the interest of the debt for the same year would absorb 28,092,0007., other charges on the consolidated fund, 2,600,000l., the army and navy (which in the present critical state of affairs on the Continent of Europe it was imprudent to reduce) would cost respectively 6,593,9451. and 6,537,055l., the ordinance 2,424,1717. ;-the probable miscellaneous charges he computed at about 4,000,000.; the amount constituting a gross total expenditure of 50,247,1717., and promising a surplus on April 5, 1852, of 1,892,000l. If the income-tax and Irish stamp duties (amounting together to 5,500,0007.) were not renewed in this session, the contemplated surplus would be converted into a deficiency to the extent of 3,610,000%. The House must, then, renew these taxes, or be prepared to have an annual deficit to the amount just stated, or reduce to an equal extent the expenditure, which on an amount of 16,000,000l. was impracticable, or to impose new taxes, whereas there existed taxes which it was desirable to reduce. He proposed then to renew the income-tax and the Irish stamp duties for three years. With regard to the uses to be made of surplus income, the payment of debt was the first of financial duties, and he laid it down as an axiom of financial prudence that in prosperous times a surplus of one million ought always to be applied to the reduction of the debt. In the quarter ending Jan. 5 an amount of 2,330,000l. principal and interest had been paid off, and there was hope of a nearly equal amount being paid off next year. After stating that the whole impost on the industry of the country was something over 42,000,0007., that on property 12,451,000l., and the total of local taxes about 13,000,000l., the right honourable baronet stated the reductions he proposed in the taxes for the coming year. The window-duty would be commuted for an annual charge of two-thirds the amount now paid upon now existing houses, while to make up the deficiency (about 700,000l.) he proposed a house tax of 1s. in the pound upon the rental of all new or improved houses. The duties on foreign and colonial coffee (now 6d. and 4d. a pound) would be equalized and reduced to 3d. The import duty on foreign timber he would cut in half, reducing sawn timber to 10s. and hewn to 7s. 6d. a ton. Agricultural seeds he intended should pay a mere registration duty of 1s. per cwt. Lastly, the charges for · pauper lunatic asylums now paid from local rates he proposed to transfer to the consolidated fund. These several items would give relief to the amount of 1,280,000, leaving for future years a surplus of 612,000l. After briefly defending the principles on which his proposals were founded, the right hon. baronet deferred taking any vote for the present, requiring only an assent to the general proposition that the Income Tax should be renewed

for a period of three years. This statement was followed by a long desultory conversation, in which the renewal of the income tax without modification and the mode of dealing with the surplus were dwelt upon with great dissatisfaction and disappointment. The Passengers' Act Amendment Bill was read a second time on the motion of Mr. Hawes. Leave was given to Mr. Anstey to bring in a Bill to establish Municipal Councils in Counties in Ireland; to Sir W. Somerville to bring in a Bill to amend the Laws relating to the valuation of Rateable Property in Ireland; and to Major Blackall to extend the Renewable Leaseholds Conversion Act.

Feb.

(LORDS.) The Earl of Hardwicke, after presenting_petitions, entered into an elaborate detail of the condition and sufferings of 18. the agricultural classes, originating a long debate, in which Earl

Granville, the Duke of Richmond, Lord Wodehouse, and Earls Strad. broke, Winchester, Malmesbury, and Fitzwilliam took part.

Feb. 19.

(COMMONS.) Lord J. Russell gave notice that on the 24th inst. he should move for a Committee of the whole House to take into consideration the mode of taking the oath of abjuration by persons professing the Jewish religion. Sir W. Clay's Compound Householders Bill was read a second time. Leave was given to Sir G. Grey to bring in a Bill to amend the Law relating to the Expenses of Prosecutions, and also a Bill for the Removal of Smithfield Market.

Feb.

(COMMONS.) On the motion of Mr. Slaney a Select Committee was appointed to consider the law of partnership and a limita

20. tion of liability, with a view to encourage useful enterprise and the additional employment of labour. Mr. Locke King then moved for leave to bring in a Bill to extend the 101. franchise to counties. Mr. Hume having seconded the motion, Lord J. Russell stated several objections to the proposed measure, with which to some extent he agreed, and promised that, if in power next session, he would introduce a Bill embodying his opinions on the subject of the extension of the franchise. Mr. Hume, Mr. Cobden, and Mr. P. Howard, having spoken in favour of the motion, the proposal was carried against Ministers by 100 to 52.

21.

Feb. (LORDS.) On the motion of Lord Langdale a Bill was read a first time authorising the appointment of an additional Vice-Chancellor. The Criminal Procedure Bill was read a second time on the motion of Lord Campbell, who subsequently brought in a Bill for the Registration of Titles, which was read a second time.

(COMMONS.) After a conversation on the conduct of certain_Puseyite clergy between Sir B. Hall, Lord J. Russell, Mr. A. Hope, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Hume, and Sir R. H. Inglis, Lord J. Russell moved the postponement of the Committee on the Budget till the 24th inst., when he would explain his reason for the request.

(LORDS.) The Marquess of Lansdowne moved the adjournment Feb. of the House till the 28th inst., and briefly detailed the circum24. stances attending the resignation of the Russell Ministry. Lord Stanley made a few remarks respecting his interview with her Majesty, and it was agreed that their lordships should meet on the morrow to consider the Marriage with a Deceased Wife's Sister Bill, which stood for second reading from last session.

(COMMONS.) Lord J. Russell explained the causes of the resignation of his Ministry, which, he said, were the smallness of the majority on Mr. D'Israeli's motion, and the ministerial defeat on Mr. Locke King's motion by 2 to 1. These occurrences taking place at the commencement of the session and with the whole of the Financial and other measures before the House led him to come to the conclusion that Government was not in a condition satisfactorily to conduct the business of the country. On the 22nd inst.,

accordingly, the Ministry resigned. His lordship further stated that Lord Stanley, in an interview with her Majesty on that day, had informed her Majesty that he was not then prepared to form a Government; and added that her Majesty had asked him (Lord J. Russell) to undertake the charge of reconstructing a Government that might be able to obtain the confidence of the House of Commons-a task which he thought it his duty to attempt. Under these circumstances the noble lord moved the adjournment of the House till the 28th inst. After a few remarks from Mr. D'Israeli and Mr. Roebuck the House adjourned.

(LORDS.) The Earl of St. Germains moved the second reading Feb. of the Marriage with a Deceased Wife's Sister Bill, and in doing 25. so maintained that the Mosaic law was not binding on Christians, quoting the authority of Jeremy Taylor, Bingham, Chief Justice Vaughan, and others in proof of this position; and stated his opinion to be that the marriages contemplated by this bill were not incestuous under the New Testament dispensation. The Archbishop of Canterbury moved the second reading this day six months. The Bishops of Exeter, St. David's, Norwich, London, and Ossory, and Lords Campbell and Brougham, supported the amendment, which was carried by 50 against 16. The Bill was accordingly lost.

(LORDS.) Lord Broughton de Gyfford (Sir J. C. Hobhouse) Feb. took the oaths and his seat. The Marquess of Lansdowne having 28. explained the negotiation relating to the ministerial crisis, the Earl of Aberdeen stated that he himself and Sir J. Graham would have been enabled to assent to all the measures proposed to them by Lord J. Russell, except the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, to which they felt an invincible repugnance. His Lordship further stated, that he had been requested to form an Administration; but that when he considered that the Bill in question had been assented to by a large majority in the Commons, he had declined the task. Lord Stanley then at considerable length rehearsed his share in the recent events, the causes of his inability to form a Government, and further announced the policy he should have adopted had he taken office. This policy comprised the following points :--The application of surplus revenue to the reduction of the Income Tax; the imposition of a moderate import duty on corn and provisions to effect the final extinction of that tax; and full investigation not hasty and passionate legislation in respect of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy.

(COMMONS.) Lord J. Russell in moving the postponement of the second reading of the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, stated the causes of his failure in forming an Administration, the main reason being the difference of opinion between himself and Lord Aberdeen and Sir J. Graham on the policy of the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, which his Lordship stated his willingness considerably to modify as far as it related to Ireland. His Lordship stated in the course of his speech that her Majesty was now guided by the counsels of the Duke of Wellington, there being in fact no adminis tration. Sir J. Graham stated his general agreement with Lord J. Russell on the subjects of Free Trade and the Extension of the Franchise, but announced his insuperable objection to the noble lord's Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, which he said would not only be inoperative but would practically undo the policy the country had been pursuing for the last thirty years; he could not consent to the further progress of this Bill or form part of an administration which had this measure of legislation for one of its chief cries. After some desultory conversation, the House adjourned.

[ March

3.

(LORDS.) The Marquess of Lansdowne informed their lordships that her Majesty, by the advice of the Duke of Wellington, had re-called the late Ministry to office. A discussion then arose on the proper policy to be pursued with regard to the Roman Catholic

Hierarchy, in which the Duke of Argyll, the Earl of Aberdeen, and Lord Brougham took part. Lord Brougham again postponed his motion for the extension of the County Courts.

(COMMONS.) On the order of the day for the second reading of the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill Lord J. Russell, having announced the resumption of office by the Ministry, moved the adjournment of the House till the 7th inst., when a statement would be made of the alterations he proposed to make in this Bill. After some desultory conversation this and the other orders were postponed till the 7th.

March

(LORDS.) Lord Monteagle presented a petition from the inhabitants of Van Diemen's Land complaining of the continued influx 4. of convicts into that colony, contrary to a pledge given by the Government. Lord Grey denied that any such pledge had been given-the Government had intended to send only reformed convicts to the colony in question; but its plans had been deranged by " a very inconsiderate address to the crown" from the House of Commons, praying that a large number of convicts might be at once removed from this country. This address had been complied with, and hence the cause of the present complaint. For the future he hoped that no obstacles would be opposed to the Government scheme, which had been fully discussed last session and approved of.

(LORDS.) The outbreak of the Caffres against British authority, March in south Africa, formed the subject of conversation between Lords Monteagle, Grey, and Stanley. Lord Brougham laid on the table a series of resolutions against the continuance of the Income Tax.

6.

March

(LORDS.) The Designs Act Extension Bill having passed through Committee, Lord Brougham moved the second reading of 7. the County Courts Extension Bill, the object of which, after a historical review of the various measures passed for the recovery of small debts, he explained at length. After a few remarks from the Lord Chancellor, Lords Langdale, Beaumont, and Cranworth, and a reply from Lord Brougham, the Bill was read a first time.

(COMMONS.) The lord mayor of Dublin, accompanied by several aldermen, appeared at the Bar and presented a petition against the abolition of the Irish Vice-royalty from the corporation of that city. In answer to Sir de Lacy Evans Lord J. Russell stated that orders had been dispatched to Sir H. Smith, enjoining him in the event of a Caffre war to incur no expenditure that might fall on the Government of this country. Mr. Locke King brought in his Bill for the Extension of the County Franchise to 10%. householders, which was ordered to be read a second time on the 2nd of April. Lord J. Russell then stated the order in which he intended to proceed with the public business; and Sir G. Grey, on the order of the day for the second reading of the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, explained the alterations which the Government proposed to make in that measure. The right honourable baronet expressed his dissent from Lord Stanley's proposal of Committees of Inquiry on this subject, as having a tendency to keep agitation alive instead of allaying it. Another proposal, to exclude Ireland from the Bill, the Government could not consistently with their duty consent to; but in order not to interfere with the purely spiritual practices of the Roman Catholic prelates, in relation to ordination and the collation of priests, it had been determined to omit entirely clauses 2 and 3 of the Bill. The right honourable baronet concluded by moving the postponement of the order of the day to the 14th inst. ; this motion, after a desultory conversation, during which great dissatisfaction was expressed at the ministerial proposal was agreed to. The Bill for the appointment of a new Vice-Chancellor was read a second time.

« ElőzőTovább »