observed, that, early in the present session, he had noticed the dangerous state of the pavement of the metropolis, and he had subsequently obtained leave to bring in a Bill to afford facilities for rendering the pavement better. Nothing, he believed, could be worse than it was at present; however, he was desirous of giving every accommodation to the various parishes, and of preventing any rumour from going abroad, which might impute to him a wish to press on the public ] a Bill of this description. Actuated by this feeling, he yesterday had a meeting with persons deputed from the different parishes, that were hostile to the measure. They allowed that the evil called for remedy and redress, and they pledged themselves, if he was not particularly partial to certain clauses of the measure he had proposed, to meet early in November, to arrange such a Bill as would meet the wishes of the public, and give general satisfaction. Resolutions, he understood, had been come to in all the parishes, by which the parties connected with the paving department bound themselves to pay every attention to the state of the streets, and to exert all the powers granted to them under the local acts of parliament, so that by the time the Bill was introduced, the public would find the pavement in a much better state than it had been for some time past. He should, therefore, with the understanding that a Bill would be brought in at the period he had specified, move, with the leave of House, "That the order for the second reading of the Bill for the better Pavement of the Metropolis, which stood for Monday next, be discharged."—The motion was agreed to.

said, that since the noble lord opposite had laid the substance of the Treaty of the 25th March, and the Memorandum, attached to it before the House, he had perused it attentively. He should take the liberty of asking in what sense that part of our explanatory Declaration was to be understood which said that a common effort was to be made against the power of Napoleon Buonaparté, but not to impose a government on France. Was he to understand that war was to be made on Napoleon Buonaparté, and that no peace was to be concluded with him as long as he remained in possession of the supreme authority in France?

answered, that the object was to destroy the power of Buonaparté, but the Treaty was only binding on the Allies so long as they chose to make it so. Of course they might agree to treat of peace, if they should hereafter think it prudent to do so.

said, that nothing could be plainer than his question, and nothing more obscure and unsatisfactory than the answer of the noble lord. Was he to understand that it was impossible for war to be avoided on the part of the country, with Napoleon Buonaparté exercising the power and government of France?

said, that the engagement entered into between the Ailed Powers might be dissolved; but that its object, at the time it was formed, certainly was to destroy the power of Buonaparté, and to make no peace with him.

felt himself as much as ever at a loss with the answer of the noble lord. When the Address was moved, it was stated that there was an alternative of war or peace; and even down to the present time, except from an occasional loose or unguarded expression which dropped from one or other of the friends of the noble lord, nothing had ever been slated to the House to induce them to think that, there was not still an alternative. He believed it to be understood by those present in the House, who had no suspicion of any delusion, that there was a possible alternative in the existing state of things of war or peace with France. Now how could this be reconciled with the Treaty and explanation on the table?

.—I think I answered the hon. member's question before. There is a possibility of resorting to the alternative mentioned, because the contracting parties may recede from their engagements; but, as to the probability of such an event, I will leave the hon. gentleman to form his own opinion from the appearance of things.

said, he had rendered his question as plain as possible, and the noble lord as usual had given a reply as equivocal as he possibly could. Those who thought that no peace should be made with Buonaparté would interpret his answer, as stating that war was unavoidable. Those who inclined to the other side of the question would infer from it, that an alternative still remained. His own interpretation was, that the Allies, when they concluded the Treaty, intended to go to war with Buonaparté, and that if they had not yet carried that plan into execution, it was in consequence of some other circumstances which had arisen since, and which the noble lord hoped might be got over, that war should ensue. He wished the House to be well informed on this subject before another message should come down, and that the noble lord should willingly do that which the House would be ] obliged to do without his assistance. If it was not conceived too early, he would tomorrow, but certainly on some day of the present week, take the sense of Parliament on the most important question—of peace or war.

assured the hon. gentleman, that if he wished to take the sense of the House, he had only to make a motion, and that he should be prepared to meet him.

inquired of the noble lord, whether his Majesty's ministers had entered into an engagement to relieve Russia of a part of the debt she had contracted with Holland, to the amount of two millions and a half, and what equivalent this country was to receive?

, under the present circumstances, could not give an answer satisfactory to the House. With respect to Holland, and the arrangements regarding her colonies, it would be premature to enter into any details.

had not put his question with any reference to a war which might be approaching. Neither did he interfere with the arrangements made with respect to the Dutch colonies. He only asked an explanation of a transaction that had taken place, and whether this country had been subjected to an incumbrance of 2,500,000l. Would the House endure that such a sum should be consigned to the treasury of Russia without any other answer than that returned by the noble lord?

maintained the impropriety of entering into the subject at this time.

wished to know whether any obligation had been entered into which the noble lord thought binding on this country?

assured the hon. gentleman that no engagement had been entered into in which the interests of the country had not been consulted.

gave notice that on Friday next he should make a motion on the state of the country relative to peace or war.

, on casting his eye over the Treaty of the 25th of March, had been struck by a paragraph not forming any part of it, but added at the close of it, by which it appeared that the Treaty had been received in this country on the 5th of April and the answer dispatched on the 8th, and that authority and instructions had been given to lord Clancarty at Vienna, to sign a subsidiary engagement consequent upon the said Treaty. He wished to know what was the nature of those instructions, and the amount of the subsidies which he had been empowered to promise, as it was impossible that his lordship should have been left entirely at liberty to pledge this country to any amount he pleased.

complained of this system of interrogation, which tended to put the House by anticipation in possession of all the subjects of negociation before they were settled or ratified. What had been or would be done, could not be executed without the consent of Parliament. The right hon. gentleman might well suppose that lord Clancarty had received instructions; but what those were, and the extent of the subsidiary engagement which he was empowered to sign, were matter of negociation with foreign Powers, and it would be premature and improper to force them into discussion.

could see no impropriety either in the question which he had put to the noble lord, or in his giving the explanation he requested. The House would be obliged to make good the subsidies to whatever amount ministers had pledged it; for if would be idle to think that after they had contracted the engagement, it would be found practicable to refuse the supplies. And if the House only knew their amount after the pledge had been given, it would be reduced to the alternative of either breaking the faith of treaties, or else of paying sums which it considered injurious to the country.

contended, that the doctrine thus broached, and the system pursued, had a tendency to subvert the constitution, by infringing on the prerogatives of the Crown respecting peace and war.

denied, that what he had said had any such tendency. The Crown had the power of making peace and declaring war, but no authority, in subsidiary treaties, to pledge Parliament to any amount it thought proper. It had no right to interfere in matters of money.

stated, that the charge made on the Crown, of its pledging the House, was not founded on fact. Foreign Powers themselves never understood more, by our subsidiary engagements, than that the Crown would recommend to Parliament to grant supplies to the amount required.

understood the noble lord to have given it as his opinion, that for ministers to state beforehand the amount of a subsidiary treaty, would be a subversion of the constitution. [Hear, hear! and No, no! from the Ministerial side.]

inquired, whether the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer would agree to lay before the House, a copy of the commission granted to lord Yarmouth, Mr. J. Nash, and Mr. C. Bicknell, relative to the Royal Parks, for which he had moved on the preceding evening, and relative to the legality of which some doubts, it appeared, had arisen in the minds of the Lords of the Treasury?

thought it would be improper to lay it before the House, as it was at present under the consideration of the law officers of the Crown. He hoped he should be able in a few days to acquaint the House with the result.

said, it was perfectly well known that for a number of years his present Majesty had set an example of farming to the country, which example was followed by the duke of Bedford, Mr. Coke, and others. The King farmed a part of the Royal Park by way of recreation; and the management of it was under different men at different times. Three gentlemen were appointed commissioners, of whom he was one, under a power of attorney. They had done no act which was not done by the former commissioners, and if it pleased God to restore his Majesty, he would receive back his farm in exactly its former state. He considered that an inquiry of this kind was prying into the private concerns of the Sovereign. His Majesty had always kept the wardenship of Windsor Forest unnamed, that the office might not be filled up by ministers. He could not help thinking this sort of prying into the private concerns of the King was rather indecorous. The only expense of the commission was a clerk of the lowest description.

said, according to the account of the noble lord, all the forests and parks might be divided into farms. This had never been the case in former times, and he should be glad to know why this new practice had prevailed. By the old practice, his Majesty had been always in the habit of appointing wardens, and there might be some reason for appointing commissioners. He wished to know whether this was really a power of attorney or a commission. There might be very good reasons for putting the matter under the consideration of the law officers, for it would require to be known whom these commissioners were to be responsible to. He knew no reason why Mr. Bicknell or Mr. Nash should devote their time without being paid for it. If there was no salary attached to their offices, it made the case more extraordinary; and he should like to know what an architect had to do with parks. If the noble lord wanted a legal adviser, he could not have a better than Mr. Bicknell; but he could not understand what assistance Mr. Nash could render him. It would be proper, therefore, that the power of attorney should be produced.

then moved, "That an humble Address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, that he will be graciously pleased to give directions, that there be laid before this House, a copy of any commission or instrument, purporting to vest certain powers and authorities in the earl of Yarmouth, John Nash, esq., and Charles Bicknell, esq. respecting the Royal Parks."

said, there had been no ranger of the Great Park since the time of the late duke of Cumberland; and the King would not appoint a ranger or warden, in order that his amusements might not become a subject of inquiry before Parliament.

apprehended, that the hon. gentleman did not consider the question as one of mere curiosity; but as no abuse had been alleged, and it had not been shown that the Treasury had been negligent, he did not consider it a subject for the control of Parliament. If his Royal Highness was not so fond of farming as his Majesty, it was not extraordinary that he should appoint persons to superintend the management of the parks. If it should appear, after inquiry had been made, that the Treasury had acted improperly, then the hon. gentleman might interpose.

opposed the motion.

did not wish to pry into the amusements of the Crown. He had conceived that the power vested in the commissioners was greater than it now appeared to be; but he wished to know why no ranger, who was the old constitutional officer, had been appoint to Windsor park?

thought it was very plain that his Royal Highness had power to sign the commission.

denied, that by the Act of the 53d George 3, it was intended to give the King a power to break up the parks that were given as a part of the royalty to maintain the dignity of the Crown. No answer whatever had been given, why a ranger of the parks had not been appointed; and he had not heard any thing to prove, that any direct advantage had been gained by a commission.

thought, that what his noble friend had stated, namely, that his Royal Highness wished all the farms to remain in the same state as his Majesty left them, was a sufficient reason why no ranger had been appointed.

begged to be informed what was the point of law that had now been referred to the Crown lawyers, and why it had not before been decided, when the commission had been so long in existence?

said, that the opinion of the legal advisers of the Crown was required as soon as the point was regularly raised.

asked whether there would be any objection made to the production of the expenses of the erection of the Thatched Palace in Windsor Great Park?

referred the hon. gentleman to the Treasury, which had issued warrants for the money which had been paid in his department.

admitted that there would be no objection to complete the accounts already upon the table, to a certain date, regarding the erections in Windsor park.

Sir Charles Burrell rose, in pursuance of his notice, to move an Address to the Regent, upon the subject of certain gratuities received by the servants of the Royal Household from individuals attending the Court. He first drew the attention of the House to the observations of the two Civil List Committees upon this subject, which was beyond the control of the Lord Steward. He referred to the ancient and evil practice of visitors giving vails to the servants of noblemen and gentlemen, now entirely discontinued, and argued upon the necessity of abolishing the custom when visitors waited on the occupant of the throne. The existence of this system was, he said, a stigma upon the national character; and foreigners went away with the conviction that every thing was to be done by money in this country, without which they could not procure even a sight of the Sovereign. In the household of the Prince of Wales no such custom had ever prevailed; but since his Royal Highness had become Regent, it had been transferred with the Royal Household. There were usually belonging to the establishment, among the inferior officers eight marshals, who paid 800l. for their situations, and yet only received a nominal salary of 22l. 15s. 6d., and they were obliged to procure themselves hats and other clothes, excepting coats, which were given once in two years: of course, they were obliged to derive their profits from the visitors of the Court. In the same situation was the serjeant-porter, whose place produced only 120l. per annum, and the yeoman-porters and groom-porters, who gave 200l. for their offices, and received salaries of 50l. and 60l. The gentlemen pensioners, or yeomen of the guard, gave 350l. for the situation, and only obtained a salary from the Household of 39l. 11s. 3d. The consequence was, that, instead of being gentlemen as formerly, they were in truth beggars, and carried their begging books round to the nobility and gentry, for subscriptions to make up the deficiency. Besides these, there were the Regent's and the Queen's gentlemen-porters, footmen, and grooms of the chambers; all of whom were paid at the same inefficient rate, and who, in consequence, were constrained to prey upon the gratuities of those who visited the Court, and who thus became liable to the most vexatious demands. The object which he had in view, and which he was satisfied would be sanctioned by the House, was, that such provision should be made for these officers in future, that they would be sufficiently remunerated, without having recourse to a system which was discreditable to the honour and dignity of the Crown, as it was disgraceful to the country. The hon. baronet concluded by moving, "That an humble Address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, submitting to his Royal Highness's gracious consideration so much of the reports of the committees on the Civil List of the years 1812 and 1813, as relates to the mode of remunerating certain inferior servants of the Royal Household by gra- ] tuities collected from individuals attending the Court."

did not object to the motion; but thought that the House would do well not to pledge itself too far, lest the sum necessary for the proposed commutation should be found greater than members would think fit to lay upon the public. The practice complained of prevailed in a greater or less degree in all the Courts of Europe.

would not concur in laving any great and additional burthen upon the nation for the sake of removing a sŭpposed stigma.

did not think that the sum could be considerable; it might be paid out of the Droits of Admiralty.

remarked, that it would be necessary not only to give compensation to those who had bought their places, but to any persons who derived emolument from the prevailing custom, and more especially to those higher officers of the household, whose emoluments depended upon the sale of the situations of their inferiors.

said, that if the dignity of the Crown required the abolition of the present fees, he did not think the House would be restrained by motives of parsimony from taking measures to put this part of the household establishment on the same footing with all other parts of it.

, in pursuance of his notice, rose to move for certain papers connected with the expenses of the New Mint. His intention of submitting this motion, he observed, had arisen out of the papers which had recently been delivered to the House on this subject. From these papers it appeared, that notwithstanding the immense sum which had been expended on the budding of this magnificent edifice, it was now found that there were a certain number of persons, who it was desirable should live within the building, for whom no accommodations were prepared, and, in consequence, four new dwelling-houses were to be built, at an expense of 4,000l. The example which this head of public expenditure had afforded he trusted would induce the House, in future, to be extremely scrupulous in examining into the objects for which they were called upon to grant money, and more especially when another great building—the new Post-office—was in contemplation. The hon. gentleman then moved for the folpapers: 1. "A statement of the number of dwelling-houses, or separate apartments used as dwelling-houses in the Mint, together with the names of the persons occupying the same, and their situations and employments, in that department; also of the number of persons who had residences in the old Mint, and the situations and employments which they held; also of the uses to which the residences or dwelling-houses in the old Mint have been convened. 2. An account of the expense of all machinery for coining erected in the Mint. 3. An account of the amount of the incidental expenses of the Mint in the year 1814, as to repairs or alterations in the building or machinery, furniture, and all other charges. 4. An account of the quantity of money or tokens coined in the New Mint since the establishment of the same, distinguishing gold from silver."

said he had not the slightest objection to granting the information for which the hon. gentleman had moved. With respect to the houses alluded to, he observed, that it was considered desirable to accommodate a certain number of persons who had been 'imported' from Birmingham, for the purpose of managing the machinery of the new mint, within its walls; but it was found impracticable, notwithstanding the extent of the edifice—hence it was determined to erect the buildings in question, which would be effected with every regard to economy.

said, he had not come to the House with any view of seconding the motion; but after what he had heard, he could not suffer it to fall to the ground, and would therefore support it. He coincided with a great deal of what had been said by the hon. mover, but yet he expressed his unwillingness to press the extension of the Property-tax to Ireland at present, especially as a committee above stairs was occupied in examining the financial concerns of that country; and he was free to say, that if it should appear to that committee that Ireland was incapable of contributing two-seventeenths of the expence of the united empire, he should be ready to entertain a proposition for reducing that proportion, although it was so settled at the period of the Union.

said, that he should most willingly have given way to the right hon. baronet (sir J. Newport, who rose at the same time that he did), par- ticularly as he feared that he was labouring under severe indisposition; but he was anxious, called upon as he had been, so distinctly and repeatedly by the hon. gentleman in the course of his speech, not to lose any time in setting himself right in the eyes of the House and of the country—and he flattered himself he should be able to show how completely unfounded the basis was, upon which the hon. gentleman had rested the whole of his argument. But before he proceeded to advert to what had fallen from the hon. gentleman, the House would forgive him, if he expressed his regret, that his hon. friend (Mr. Davies Giddy) had been induced to second the motion, agreeing, as he did, with the hon. mover only upon general principles, but differing from him on the most important point, namely, the applicability of the measure to Ireland at the present period. For the hon. gentleman, who seconded the motion, had distinctly stated, that he doubted both the policy and the practicability of carrying the motion into effect at present, and had adverted to the expediency, or perhaps the necessity, of a revision of the principles upon which the joint contributions of Great Britain and Ireland were founded at the Union. He was happy to have it in his power to do justice to the sentiments by which that hon. gentleman was animated every where, but particularly in the committee which had been appointed to examine into the state of the finances of Ireland. The question now before the House was of much too high a nature, and embraced too many important considerations, to be argued or decided upon the narrow grounds which the hon. gentleman had urged to the House. It was much too great a question to be treated as a mere naked measure of finance. In considering a question of this nature, it was necessary that the House should bear in mind—indeed, it was impossible to put out of view—the political, the local, the natural state of that country, of which the hon. gentleman had candidly confessed himself to be completely ignorant; or he would rather say, with respect to which the hon. gentleman certainly wanted a great deal of information. The very arguments which he had urged, and the conclusions he had drawn, showed how completely misinformed he was with respect to the state of Ireland. He should now proceed to follow the hon. gentleman through his statements, ] not only for the purpose of vindicating himself and his predecessors, in the office which he had the honour to hold, but to vindicate Ireland from the charges which the hon. gentleman had brought against her. The hon. gentleman had given to the House a statement of the debt of Ireland, of her resources, and of the deficiency of her proportion of the joint contribution. The House would not be surprised if he was not prepared to go minutely into an investigation of all the financial calculations of the hon. gentleman; because it was impossible for him to suppose, that the hon. gentleman would have thought it necessary to introduce them in this discussion. He conceived that it would be merely necessary for him to show to the House, that it would be inexpedient, under the present circumstances, to apply the Property-tax to Ireland, which it was proposed to enact in Great Britain for one year only. It was true that the hon. member had said, that he did not consider that tax as applied in Great Britain for one year only; but it would not be fair to call upon him to refute the opinion which the hon. gentleman chose to entertain upon the subject. The hon. gentleman did not think proper, upon that subject, to give credit to his right hon. friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had proposed it for one year; or to the House, who had voted it for that period—he took his solitary stand, and said, This tax is not voted for one year, because I think it is not; against such a mode of reasoning, the House would not expect him to contend. But though he had not brought all the documents which would be necessary to enable him to follow the hon. gentleman through the whole of his statement, his memory was sufficiently accurate, he hoped, to enable him to point out innumerable errors into which he had fallen. Indeed, there were some parts of the hon. gentleman's statement, in which his mistakes were so obvious, that they could not escape the observation of those who had paid even the slightest attention to the finances of Ireland. The result, however, of the hon. gentleman's calculations, was, that there was a very considerable balance against Ireland; and as he had applied himself particularly to the last three years, the weight of his charges fell upon him, and upon his right hon. friend who sat near him (Mr. Wellesley Pole). It was, however, a little hard, that as the hon. gentleman had directed his charges against the last three years of the administration of the finances of Ireland, he should have thought it fair to associate with them the debt contracted in 1811, under circumstances of a very peculiar nature. The hon. gentleman had asserted, that, for the two last years, he (Mr. Fitzgerald) had been unable to provide ways and means to meet the expenses, and had spoken lightly of the exertions made by Ireland in that period—exertions which, he would say without fear of contradiction, were greater than were ever made by any country situated as Ireland was; which were great, even when put in comparison with those of England at the commencement of the present reign, when she was great, powerful, and wealthy. It was not necessary for him to enter into a defence of the transactions of 1811; but he might be permitted to remind the House, that, with respect to that loan, Mr. Perceval then said, not indeed that it was to be considered as cancelled, but that there were circumstances connected with the proportions of the contribution as fixed at the Union, which ought to be maturely considered by Great Britain, and that the consideration of that Loan ought to be deferred till one of those periods, when, by the articles of the Union, the debts of the two countries were to come under the revision of Parliament. In proceeding to controvert the arguments of the hon. gentleman, he begged that he might not be supposed to insinuate, that the hon. gentleman had intentionally misstated any of the figures, or had urged any argument, of the validity of which he was not himself convinced; he entertained too high an opinion of the hon. gentleman, and felt too sincere a respect for him, to insinuate any thing of the kind; and, therefore, it, in the warmth of discussion, any expression should happen to fall from him that might be supposed capable of such a meaning, he begged to declare, that nothing could be further from his intention. The hon. gentleman began by stating, that besides the loan of 1811, there was 6,100,000l. due to Great Britain from Ireland, making, together, above eleven millions. And here it was necessary to observe, that the hon. gentleman, throughout the whole of his argument, had done that which it was impossible to do, consistently with any fair or even intelligible view of the subject;—he had formed all his calculations upon the supposition, that the accounts of the year ] ending on the 5th of January, were made up on that day. The House knew very well, that the joint accounts were not settled at that period, and, therefore, any arguments or calculations founded upon that supposition, must be erroneous. He begged, in the first place, to observe, that of this sum of 6,100,000l., 3,500,000l. remained in the Exchequer of Great Britain, applicable to the uses of the contribution account, and 2,000,000l. surplus remained in Ireland, to be remitted to this country on further account. Every exertion had been made to accomplish remittances to this country, on account of the debt due on contribution account; but it had been found impossible to make remittances to a greater extent than 1,250,000l. without injuriously interfering with the mercantile concerns of Ireland. When his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, last year, stated the English Budget, he estimated the whole contribution of Ireland at 8,700,000l,; but in point of fact, the charge was 10,500,000l., exceeding the estimate by 1,800,000l.; and that sum, the hon. gentleman had conceived himself warranted in classing as a part of the debt due by Ireland to Great Britain, for which provision should have been made, although the hon. gentleman ought to have been aware, that the knowledge of this additional charge could only be derived from the documents which had been laid upon the table a few days ago, containing the accounts of the expenditure of each country. Instead, therefore, of a deficiency of 6,100,000l., as stated by the hon. gentleman, there was, in point of fact, a deficiency only of 800,000l.; and had it not been for an excess of expenditure over estimate, there would have been a surplus of nearly 1,000,000l. The hon. gentleman then adverted to the loans raised for Ireland within the last three years, which, he said, had been raised at 7½ per cent.; he then stated the amount of the tax raised to pay the interest, in which, he said, there was a deficiency of 400,000l. in the same period as the provision ought to have been 1,600,000l., and actually produced but 1,200,000l. He would take upon himself to convince the hon. gentleman, that he was completely mistaken on both those points. In the year 1812, 4,700,000l. was raised in England, at a charge, including the sinking fund, of 7l. 0s. 9d. per cent.; and a loan was raised in Ireland of 1,500,000l. at the lesser charge of 6l. 4s. In 1815, 6,500,000l. was raised in England, at 7l. 4s. 7d. per cent.; and 2,000,000l. in Ireland, at 6l. 8s. 1d. And in 1814, 5,958,000l. was raised in England, at 5l. 18s. 9d. and 3,000,000l. in Ireland, at 5l. 11s. 9d. [Mr. Bankes seeming to doubt the accuracy of the latter statement], Mr. Fitzgerald said, he was quite certain that he was correct; because, though for the reason he had before stated, he had not brought all the necessary documents down to the House, he recollected perfectly well having called the attention of the House, last year, to this extraordinary circumstance, of the Irish Loan having been borrowed on lower terms than the English, notwithstanding the legal rate of interest in Ireland was one per cent, higher than it was in England. The entire charge, therefore, for these years, was, in 1812, 422,000l.—in 1815, 595,000l.—and in 1814, 521,000l., making an aggregate, for the three years, of 1,540,000l. The estimate of the taxes, to meet this charge, was, in 1812, 468,000l.—1813, 600,000l.; and, in 1814, 535,000l., amounting to 1,605,000l. He had no objection to meet the hon. gentleman on the ground he had taken, either with respect to the nature of the taxes, or the pace they had kept with the burthens of the country. The increase of the revenue in 1815, over that of 1812, was 1,561,900l. The estimate of the taxes was 1,603,000l., the deficiency, therefore, was but 230,000l.; and, as in the produce which he had stated, credit was only given to him for six months, of the taxes laid on by him last year, he had a just right to assume, that the other half-year's produce would be 267,000l., which would yield an exceeding of nearly 40,000l. He begged to observe, that he should not have been surprised if the new taxes had been unproductive last year, because they frequently were so, not only in Ireland, but in England also, the first year they were laid on. Besides, in Ireland the sources of taxation were so narrow, that individuals were frequently able to anticipate the taxes that were to be imposed, and were consequently enabled very much to diminish the receipt of the tax for a certain period after it was imposed. The hon. gentleman had animadverted upon the materials upon which the taxes in Ireland were imposed; they were, he said, almost always the same, such as the duties on spirits, sometimes raised, sometimes lowered, tobacco, stamps; and ] we had last year, said the hon. gentleman, a schedule of the customs. In his enumeration of the articles of taxation, the hon. gentleman had totally omitted the very great augmentation which had taken place in the assessed taxes, and it was some consolation to him to find, that what had been represented as one of the most objectionable of his taxes was so soon forgotten. But was the House aware that what the hon. gentleman had passed so slightly as a mere regulation of the Customs, was, in fact, no less than the important measure of equalizing the whole of the Custom-duties of Ireland to those of Great Britain—a measure more extensive than ever had been adopted in England, and by which the Custom-duties were made permanent in Ireland, as in England, and all the English war-duties were thereby adopted in that country. The House, he hoped, would forgive him for going into this detail, because no one could have supposed that what the hon. gentleman had lightly spoken of as a schedule of the customs, was really such a measure as he had now described. He did not arrogate to himself any credit for having brought forward that measure, because he had merely discharged his duty; but surely, if any man had ever departed from that system, which the hon. gentleman had reproached him with, of not looking difficulties in the face, and making exertions to meet the pressure of the day, he had done it in the instance to which he alluded. With respect to spirits, he could not help observing that the observations which had been made upon this subject at different times, were extremely inconsistent. When a right hon. friend of his (Mr. Foster) had proposed to diminish the duty on spirits, it was objected to as being calculated to injure the health, and to demoralize the people, by making spirits cheap. When the duties were afterwards raised, partly in consequence of the recommendation of a committee for the purpose of encouraging the use of malt liquor in Ireland, objections were again made, and he thought rather inconsistently, and so thought an hon. gentleman opposite to him (Mr. Wilberforce), who now cheered the hon. gentleman, and supported him, who was himself a member of that committee, and who, on the occasion alluded to, supported the increase of duty on spirits, on the principle of encouraging the consumption of malt-liquor in preference. So much for 1812.—In 1813,the taxes were on tobacco, excise upon leather, assessed taxes, postage, and malt. There was not one of those taxes that had not exceeded the estimate, particularly the malt-duty. There was, at the same time, a duty of 6d. upon spirits, which was pressed upon him by the representatives of Ireland, and necessarily concurrent with the increased duty on malt. Last year there was the "schedule of the customs;" but the hon. gentleman said, there were spirits again—there was so, but the hon. gentleman knew very well the circumstances under which it was imposed—he knew that it was done to remove, if possible, the jealousies and apprehensions of the distillers of England, and to do away objections that had been urged to the intercourse of spirits, to which Ireland is entitled under the Act of Union. There was a paper, to which the hon. gentleman might have had access, as it had been laid before the Committee of Finances, up stairs. The statements in that paper were of a most satisfactory nature, and with the permission of the House, he would read some extracts from it, to show the inaccuracy both of the hon. gentleman's statements and of his conclusions. Mr. Fitzgerald then slated, that the produce of malt in 1802, was 116,000l. in 1811, 348,000l.—and in 1814, 566,000l. He would not trouble the House with going through all the small articles contained in that paper, but merely touch upon the leading ones. Spirits, in 1802, produced 270,000l.—in 1811, 685,000l.—in 1814, 1,575,000l. Tobacco, in 1802, gave 140,000l.—in 1811, 311,000l.—in 1814, 504,000l. Hearth-money had in creased from 32,000l., in 1802, to 64,000l. in 1814. The Assessed-taxes had been doubled, quadrupled, and quintupled. The Servants duty had been increased fourfold. Windows, in the last three years, had been increased 100,000l. Without going into more details, he should only observe, that many thousand instances had occurred, in which articles had been brought to charge under the assessed taxes, which had never been made productive before; and he would show, when he came to state his budget to the House, improvements which had been made in the collection of taxes, which were absolutely unexampled. He would now, with the permission of the House, proceed to state the amount ] of the revenues in the three years which the hon. gentleman had selected for his particular animadversion. In 1813, it was 6,016,448l.—in 1814, 6,160,190l.—and, in 1815, 6,716,056l.—[Mr. Bankes said, across the House, "gross revenue?"]—Certainly he was speaking of gross revenue; and he was perfectly justified in so taking it; for the propositions of the joint contribution were founded upon the gross, not the net revenue. The hon. gentleman had repeatedly noticed the difference of the expense of the collection of the revenue in the two countries: in Ireland it was above 14 per cent., whereas, in England, it was little more than 6 per cent. That was true; but the reason must be obvious to any one who considered the different amount of the revenues of the two countries. In the one they were about 65 millions, and in the other about six millions. A moment's reflection must convince the House, that the expense of collection must be greater in Ireland, where, though the sum to be collected was smaller, yet the establishment was nearly as large as it was in Great Britain, and the number of the persons employed nearly as great. But if the revenues of Ireland were to be increased three-fold, the collection would remain the same, and then they would be raised at less than 5 per cent., and, therefore, cheaper than they were collected in Great Britain. The hon. gentleman had of course fallen into a similar fallacy with regard to the Property-tax, which he said was not above 2l. 3s. 5d. per cent. But the hon. gentleman and the House must be aware, that a very large proportion of the Property-tax was collected without any expense at all, he meant that which was deducted from the dividends paid at the Bank. Besides, it was to be recollected, that, in England, the commissioners were not paid. He thought it right here to advert to a mistake into which the hon. gentleman had fallen—a mistake, however, in which it was highly important, that neither the House nor the hon. gentleman should for a moment continue. The hon. gentleman had stated, that the military in Ireland were employed in the collection of the revenue, and particularly that which was raised upon the distillers. Nothing could be more unfounded than that statement of the hon. member. The revenue in Ireland, of every kind, was raised by the civil officers, employed for that purpose, without any interference or aid of the military. The mistake of the hon. gentleman, he supposed, was founded upon the circumstance of the military being employed in putting down illegal distillation, and in assisting to apprehend persons who had violated, or were violating the penal law of the country. Outrages certainly had been committed in particular cases, and resistance had been offered; but it was when attempts were made to seize illegal stills, and not when the civil officers were collecting the revenue. He did not mean to conceal facts from the House, or to deny that great outrages had at various times been committed. He did not wish to hide the dark side of the picture; the people of Ireland had enough to be proud of; they were known to be gallant, generous, and brave; and those very disorders which every one lamented, might be the ebullitions of minds, more ardent and less cultivated perhaps than yours, but possessing some of the finest sentiments that adorn human nature. I think, said the right hon. gentleman, I know my country; and if the hon. mover was acquainted, in the slightest degree, with our wishes or our feelings, he would not have described us as he has done to the House to-night. But will not the House require some more data to proceed upon, before they adopt the hon. gentleman's proposition? He repeated—of that proposition he meant not to complain, he felt every respect for the quarter from which it proceeded, and for the public motives by which it was dictated; but had the hon. gentleman formed even the vague estimate of what the produce of this tax in Ireland might be, if we were to proceed upon any of those grounds upon which the Union proportion of contribution had been calculated; and he had no difficulty in saying, that erroneous as he believed them to be, as the measure of our expenditure, or of our means, they would be found still more fallacious as a scale of the respective income or property of the two islands; yet, adopting that proportion for the sake of argument only, the produce of a property-tax in Ireland, taking the highest relative produce which had ever been yielded in Great Britain, the produce from Ireland at 2–17 ths would be (he would state it generally) in amount, 1,600,000l. The hon. gentleman would bear in mind, and it must not escape the recollection of the House, that this was ] giving credit to Ireland for a collection of the tax in the first year of its application, under circumstances of difficulty, which he would advert to by-and-bye, as accurate, as vigilant, and perfect as the experience of sixteen years, and the enactment of successive laws, had made it in Great Britain. If he were to compare the probable produce of tins duty in Ireland, with that which it had yielded in Great Britain on its first introduction there, he need not tell the hon. gentleman 2–17ths would not aid him much in providing ways and means for this single year, for which he had been good enough to undertake for him to find a supply;—but what further, Sir, was to be deducted from this sum of a million and a half, which we thus hope to receive?—first, the Property-tax now paid in this country by Irish proprietors resident in Great Britain. It is difficult to estimate, and impossible to ascertain the amount of that absentee property, which thus contributes to the British exchequer. In the year 1804, the state of the exchanges between Great Britain and Ireland, which had risen to an inordinate height against Ireland, were brought, by a right hon. friend of his (Mr. Foster), under the consideration of a committee of that House. It was many years before he (Mr. Fitzgerald) had the honour of a seat in it; but he recollected it was in evidence before that committee, stated by a gentleman who is since deceased, a man of ability and extensive information, (he meant Mr. Paget, whose house was then, as it is now, under his successor, Mr. Bainbridge, the principal medium of remittance between Great Britain and Ireland, as well of private remittance, as of all those sums which are sent over on account of the Irish Treasury)—it was stated by him, and he (Mr. Fitzgerald) had reason to think understood, that the remittances of absentees rents alone amounted to 2,000,000l. annually. If we considered the great increase of the number of our absentees, which was natural, and of which, whatever might be the local effect in the country winch they left, it would be idle in him to complain, for it was out of our power to control it—if we considered further the great increase which the hon. gentleman was justified, he admitted, in stating, as an additional ground of the motion which he had submitted, in the rent and value of our lands, it would not be too much to estimate the remittances to absentees at the annual sum of 3,000,000l. He was sure that he was warranted in estimating it at this sum. The tax received upon Irish rents in the Exchequer of England, was 300,000l. This sum, then, was to be deducted from the gross produce which was expected from the duty on Irish property; for he did not suppose that the hon. gentleman would, if his principle was to be extended to Ireland, propose that this portion of the duty should remain in the British Treasury; if he did so, and thus charge the Irish landlord twice over, it would, indeed, be the most effectual absentee tax that could be suggested:—that which he (Mr. Fitzgerald) had thrown out as feasible in the last year, was but a trifle to it; and yet gentlemen had then started, even at the spectre of a tax, which would have affected the land of the absentee. But, to return—300,000l. per annum was to be deducted on this head: there was another deduction to be made also, and we could get more accurately at the grounds of that; the dividends upon that portion of the Irish debt, which had been created in this country, and of which the interest was payable here, were already subjected to the Property-tax; and thus the resources of Ireland were made to contribute to that amount of British duty which had been stated. That is, either her means had paid you so much, or provision had been, found for it in these successive loans which had now become her permanent charge. The amount of our funded debt in Great Britain on the 5th of January last, was 94,000,000l.; he hoped this year would not add much more than ten millions. The interest payable in Great Britain on that debt, was upwards of 4,000,000l.; but allowing for that portion of the debt which, was redeemed, he might state the amount of Property-tax thus received from Ireland, at 300,000l. more. You thus receive on her debt as much as from the absentee proprietors. Your estimated produce, then, in Ireland is reduced to 1,000,000l. Did the hon. gentleman promise—did he even hope, that in the first year of its application, in any year of its application, the collection of that duty-could be made as effectual, or the duty itself relatively as effectual as the experience of years had made it in Great Britain? He was ready to do justice to the public spirit of the English nation, to that spirit which had carried the country though the greatest contest in which any country had ] ever been engaged; that spirit, he knew, was not extinct; and if we were again to assume the proud character which in the last war we had sustained, not less by the firm perseverance of the people, than by the successes of those armies whom a Wellington led, we should find, in that public spirit and constancy, which all classes of society had manifested, resources for the contest—far, far beyond what a measure of finance could give, or any revenues, from either country, though they had been called war's sinews, and were no contemptible weapons of war. But while he admitted all this—while he admitted that public spirit which he was convinced, in many instances, would not evade the fair, the legitimate, the lavish contribution to the public exigency; yet, had we not heard hon. gentlemen, even while approving the principle, yet complaining of its inquisitorial power? Upon what ground does my right hon. friend (Mr. Vansittart) resist the modifications which are so earnestly proposed, but that it is his duty to guard against those evasions which, even in England, would be attempted—which in every country would be attempted, and which, if the hon. gentleman would prevent in Ireland, he must give us something more than his naked resolution—something more than a mere assertion of principle;—he must show us that assimilation is not only good, but will be productive in a greater degree, than the application of any other principles is likely to prove. But, how productive? By what machinery does he propose that his duties are to be collected? Does he expect to find a class of men corresponding to those who act as commissioners of the Property-tax in that part of the United Kingdom with which he is acquainted, who are to be our un-salaried commissioners? To whom, said the right hon. gentleman, are we to confide this inquisition of a people? I would rather dwell with pleasure on those traits of national character, of which, as an Irishman, I am proud, than on that state of our society, than on those habits of our gentry, those unhappy feelings which religious and political differences have produced, and any or all of which leave us without that body of persons, who in England discharge so many important duties, and to whom none are confided more important than this. But, Sir, look at your own Acts; look at the complicated machinery which you employ, look at the corrected failures of one system, and the anticipated failure of another—in the first instance, the commissioners of your Land-tax to be commissioners of this Act, and to be chosen at a general meeting convened by the sheriff; the hon. gentleman is perhaps not aware that we have no persons in Ireland corresponding with them—yet these, Sir, are to choose commissioners, from whom I know not. I will not weary the House with the enumeration in the detail, but I think there are 57 cases of commissioners enumerated in the different Acts. I do not now refer to this as a further illustration of the inexpediency, of the absurdity, I had almost said, of creating this fabric for even a single year. I do not desire or wish to prove further than I have already done, how ridiculous it would be to enact for this year, to take as the source of that revenue which ought to flow into the Exchequer before that year is elapsed, a system of complicated operation, which it would take three years of industry equal to the hon. gentleman's, and of a zealous desire to collect Irish revenues, not less than his, to make available or productive: but I refer to this, to show that all the revenue which the hon. gentleman would thus collect, is not to be considered as clear gain. I believe he has more than once adverted to the expense of the collection of our revenue: I hope he will find in many branches of it, that since I have had the honour of administering that department, that expense has been diminished. At the same time it is inevitably greater than the example of Great Britain would lead those who are unacquainted with the subject to expect: but what is to be the expense of these new establishments in Ireland?—At least, we do not desire what I have seen some of the public prints impute to my right hon. friend (Mr. Vansittart), as his motive fop continuing the tax in England—this multiplication of new appointments, those armies of well-paid commissioners and assessors, whom the hon. gentleman, contrary to his ancient principles of economy, would create. In a word, Sir, the expense would interfere seriously, indeed, with, the hon. gentleman's project, however plausible it may seem. I am convinced, that, after the deductions which I have stated—after allowing for the expense which would attend its collection, the residue would not only not supersede the necessity of a great loan, would not only not ] enable us, after the example of England, to raise within the year, those supplies which the expenditure of the coming year will call for, but that its produce would fall far short of those taxes which it will be my duty to propose as provision for the Loan. They will be, I lament to say, of unexampled amount; but I shall not shrink from my duty in proposing, and I trust the country, even by these discussions, will not be unprepared to bear them; this will afford a permanent provision for the interest of that debt which we must contract, while the proposition of the hon. gentleman would give us only a tax for a single year—a tax which, if he is sincere in hoping that it will last in England only for the period of its present proposed enactment, he must also hope that we should be obliged, in Ireland, to repeal it; and I would ask him, where the public creditor was to look for his permanent security, or if he would be then ready to suggest other measures to supply the necessary deficiency of our revenue? I think, Sir, that I have stated enough to justify me in resisting the hon. gentleman's motion, and in calling upon the House to resist it. I have shown, I hope to the satisfaction of the House, that the tax being proposed in England for one year, it could not be taken as a permanent provision for payment of that debt which we must create. I think I have a right to say, that this measure which he suggests, could not be fairly in operation until long after that period at which we hope to see its expiration in Great Britain. I have endeavoured to prove that so large a proportion of your duty in England must be affected by the deduction which in common fairness must be made, that even you would have to find fresh means, to no inconsiderable amount, to compensate that deficiency; and I am firmly convinced, that without reference to any local or political circumstances of the country, the creation of a system so widely complicated, and of such accumulated expense, would detract so much from the internal produce of the tax, that, if I had been satisfied to take this alone as the provision for the present year, in the expectation that it would be sufficient, I should have been deceiving both Parliament and myself. In what I have ventured to offer, I have taken a view only comparative of the motion of which the hon. gentleman has made, and of the means to which I shall myself recur. It is not from any fear of public obloquy, that I avoid what he calls the only statesman-like measure of finance. I am not ashamed to avow that I value popularity; I should be ashamed of myself if I did not; but it is that popularity which follows one's actions, and not which one's actions follow. If the necessities of the country should still unhappily continue, and we are to be placed either on a war expenditure, or obliged to continue in that state of military preparation of which the expenditure is as great as that of war, it may be my duty to propose to Parliament, a measure as strong as that which now I deprecate; from the performance of that duty I shall not shrink. I shall find in the public necessity my justification, if indeed any justification be necessary in the eyes of those who have never been backward when they could prove their attachment to the common cause; when they could participate in your dangers, or contribute to the glory of the empire. Sir, I shall say no more—what my feelings are on this subject is of little moment; but Ireland awaits with hope and with confidence the decision of the House of Commons.

declared, that the right hon. gentleman had so ably vindicated the state and exertions of Ireland, that he had left him little to say. In 14 years since the Union, Ireland had brought into the Exchequer of the country considerably upwards of 60 millions, or more than four millions and a half annually, by taxes, exclusively of what she had been called on to produce by way of loan. He trusted the House would not vote an abstract proposition of this nature, as it would throw a firebrand of irreparable injury between both countries, which would be most fatal to Ireland.

made a few observations in support of the arguments of his right hon. friend, (Mr. V. Fitzgerald). If a tax were proposed, the collection of which was not feasible, it was doing nothing whatever for the country. He thought the Property-tax of England might operate for Ireland as an Absentee tax.

said, he had in all the stages opposed the renewal of the Property-tax, as the means of entering into a new war, which he deprecated as ruinous to the finances and security of the country. He agreed with the Chancellor of the Irish Exchequer, that persons competent to assess and collect the tax in ] Ireland were not to be found, and that, therefore, it was particularly unfit to be introduced into Ireland. The right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer for Ireland had estimated the annual amount of absentee income, which was spent in this country, and from which Ireland derived no benefit, at three millions annually, and the amount of the interest of debt payable to English creditors at four millions; the Income-tax on which, amounting to 700,000l. a year, ought in justice to be carried to the credit of Ireland, which would make good the present deficiency in the revenue, and provide for the loan of the year. In reply to the Secretary for Ireland he said, there was this difference in the tax proposed in the Irish parliament on absentees and the present tax, that the first was receivable in aid of the Irish revenue, and the present tax was payable into the Treasury of England.

observed, that he had heard with the greatest pleasure the able arguments of the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer for Ireland, and that he entirely coincided in opinion with him on the subject.

replied. After which the House divided: