moved the second reading of the Parlethorpe Chapelry Bill.

opposed the Bill. He designated this as an attempt to smuggle a private Bill through that House, which would have the effect of wresting from the rector, the Dean of Lincoln, without the sanction or colour of law, under the specious pretext of an endowment, the right t which he possessed in the chapelry, which would devolve on Earl Manvers, who previously had obtained the sanction of his relative, the Archbishop of York, for so doing. It was an infringement on the right of Church property of the most dangerous description—that of converting it to private purposes; an infringement which he called on the House not to sanction, and on that ground he claimed their support in the amendment which he would propose, that the Bill be read a second time that day six months.

said, that it would be much more agreeable to him to abstain from introducing any personal allusions in supporting this measure, but the hon. Member for Lincoln had rendered it necessary that he (Mr. Vernon) should go into some of the details in vindication of the character of the noble Lord (Manvers) who had proposed to effect this endowment. The noble Lord did not seek for any benefit to himself, nor to divest the Vicar of Edwinstowe of any of his present or contingent income, which he was entitled to by law. He was desirous of promoting the efficiency of the Church, by securing weekly services in a chapel in which, by law, there was only provision for alternate duty. He (Mr. Vernon) was grieved to learn that the opposition to this splendid proposal should proceed from a dignitary of the Church, he alluded to the Dean of Lincoln, the patron; the incumbent, who is his son, having in the first instance acquiesced in the duty being performed by Lord Manvers's chaplain. Therefore, no scruples could have existed in that quarter as to parting with the cure of souls of one hundred persons out of the 2,000 with whose charge he was originally intrusted. He (Mr. Vernon) believed that the apprehension which the Dean entertained was this, that if a new benefice was created, the time might arrive when persons would inquire how it happened that the tithes of that township had gotten into the pocket of the Dean of Lincoln and the vicar of another benefice; and as there was a disposition, on the part of the real friends of the Church to apply the surplus incomes of chapters to promote religious services in the districts from which the revenues were derived, he might fear that something would spring up to prevent the appropriation of those funds. The hon. Member for Lincoln had stated that this Bill was in contravention of an Act of Parliament, in which he was mistaken. He (Mr. Vernon) contended that the patron and incumbent would be benefited by this measure; for it exonerated the latter from the alternate duty in that chapel, which was one of three chapelries attached to a decayed church, and from which there had proceeded many memorials to the Archbishop, complaining of the inefficient discharge of divine service. It was impossible for one incumbent to do justice to all the duties. The delay of bringing forward this question arose from a disinclination to drag before the public circumstances so discreditable to the Church; and a hope was entertained that, through the intervention of friends, the Dean would have conceded the point; and, moreover, it was held out that he would endow the chapelry out of the chapter funds. He (Mr. Vernon) should have approved of this so much, that he would not have proceeded with a private Bill in contravention of such an object; but in that he was disappointed, and no other alternative was left. The Archbishop—who was acting on the commission for extending more widely the services of the Church—accepted the proposal of Lord Manvers, and earnestly recommended it to the consent of the incumbent, who had referred himself in his answer to the pleasure of his patron. With all these facts before him, he would not shrink from facing the Gallant Officer's amendment.

confirmed the statement of the hon. Member who spoke last. According to his (Mr. Denison's) notion, the Gallant Officer, the Member for Lincoln, had not sufficiently informed himself of the facts of the case to enable him to make a clear or satisfactory statement, in which he had signally failed. He would support the second reading.

was much surprised that that which was a public question should be brought forward in the nature of a private Bill. It appeared strange to him to hear of individuals being so liberal, and of hon. Gentlemen now coming forward to prop the Church. It was also rather strange to see the noble Lord (Manvers) and the Archbishop of York opposing the views of the vicar and incumbent. He (Mr. Hume) was of opinion that the opposition of the gallant Officer to this Bill was well founded; for if the noble Lord succeeded in the endowment, there was nothing to prevent him from coming forward hereafter and claiming compensation. Why not the Commissioners come forward and report to that House what ought to be done? He hoped the Bill would not proceed further.

considered the Bill as calculated to form a new district, and consequently the Church should defray the expenses. He trusted the Bill would he thrown out.

supported the motion, and defended the generous proposition of the noble Earl (Manvers), by whose liberality in the cause of religion the Church would be a gainer of 100l a year. He would cordially support the Bill.

only discharged what he deemed to be his duty in the part he took in opposing this measure, but he disclaimed all want of proper feeling towards the noble Lord.

presented a petition from a number of persons interested in the tea trade, and begged to put a question, founded on the petition, to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The House was aware that all teas arriving after 1st July next would be subject to the equal duty of 2s. 1d. per 1b. The quantity of Bohea imported, he was sorry to say, was unusually great, and the loss upon it, therefore would be very considerable. He had been intrusted by the petitioners, comprising the principal persons in the tea trade, to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it would not be possible to afford them some relief?

said, that this topic had been recently brought under the consideration of the House when he had stated the course he was prepared to pursue. The facts were in a very narrow compass. By the alteration made in the tea-duties last year, all teas imported after the 1st July next were to be admitted at an equal duty of 2s. 1d. per pound: up to the 1st July the old duty would continue in operation. Of this change in the law all parties had knowledge, not by a Treasury intimation, but by a positive Act of Parliament. It so happened, however, that the quantity of Bohea teas imported, and about to be imported, infinitely exceeded the calculation; and under these circumstances, certain parties had applied to the Treasury to be allowed to take their bonded Bohea teas out of the warehouses after the 1st July, at the lower rate of duty. His reply had been that the Treasury had no power, and that Parliament alone could give the parties relief, if due ground were shown. They represented how seriously they should be injured, and some of them, perhaps, altogether ruined; but still he felt that he could do nothing but refuse acquiescence. They stated further, that there were no adverse interests to be damnified by a relaxation of the law, and that importers and dealers were all agreed upon the point. He had, therefore, moved for copies of the memorial to the lords of the Treasury, in order to call the attention of all persons to the pending question; and undoubtedly he had received intimations, not very numerously signed, nor from many places, showing that to comply with what was required would be injurious and inconvenient. He wished it to be distinctly understood that on revenue grounds he did not oppose the object of the memorialists: he should make no objection, as Finance Minister, to any relaxation; but he saw very good reason for not altering the existing law upon insufficient grounds and ex parte statements. No alteration could be required till the 1st of July, and in the mean time the papers before the House would be printed and circulated. The hon. Member would excuse him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) if, on the present occasion, he did not give a distinct reply to the question. He was anxious first to ascertain whether there were or were not any adverse interests. It was a subject not involved in the finance statement he was about to make; but at all events he intended to reserve himself respecting it until he should be able to ascertain whether any, and what, parties would be injured or affected by the introduction of a measure to accomplish the wishes of the petitioners.

put a question respecting the manufacture of Sugar from Beet-root—a process which he understood had lately been brought into this country. He wished to know whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer was acquainted with the fact, and whether he did not think that success in such an experiment would be attended with the most injurious consequences? If it succeeded, it might be necessary, as had been the case with the recent cultivation of tobacco, to pluck up the beetroot by the roots.

replied, that he had heard of such an experiment, and that the result had been a most signal failure.

rose and said: Sir, when it fell to my lot, in the course of the last Session, to make a statement of the financial condition of the country, I was listened to with great, though undeserved, kindness and attention. That indulgence I could only attribute to the consideration shown to one who, for the first time, undertakes such a task, and enters upon his duties as Minister of Finance under most arduous and peculiar circumstances. On the present occasion, I am aware that I cannot advance any claims to a similar indulgence. I know it will be justly considered that if, in the interval that has since passed, I possess and have exerted diligence to seek, and industry to arrange, the materials necessary for a financial statement, I ought now to come before the House fully prepared for the performance of this important duty. While I admit the justice of this principle as swaying the minds of those whom I address, I cannot but feel that this conviction still increases my embarrassment. I have, however, one encouragement. In the statement which I am about to make I am assured of the facts of the case; and if I should be able to lay that statement before the Committee in a simple and intelligible manner, though I cannot offer any greater claims to its attention than the patient industry with which I have collected my materials, and the clearness with which I state them, I feel confident that I shall be as able as I shall be ready to explain any points on which explanation may be required. The course which I propose to pursue on this occasion is—to state, first, the income and expenditure of the last, and the anticipated income and expenditure of the present year; and, secondly, to refer to the comparative amounts of the revenues of the Customs, Excise, Stamps, Post-office, and Taxes, in the two years; and to conclude by making such general observations—and they shall be as few as circumances will permit—as will indicate the internal state of the country. Having given such explanations, it will become my duty to show in what manner I am prepared to deal with any surplus that may be at the disposal of the House, and what are the taxes which I propose as subjects of modification, reduction, or repeal. The difficulties with which I have to deal in this latter part of my task are demonstrated by the multitude of petitions for the repeal of taxes which have been presented to this House from all parts of the country. I dare not attempt to enumerate them, but I believe I am correct in stating that there is scarcely one existing tax for the repeal or reduction of which petitions have not been presented. I am sorry to be compelled to state that the finances of the country do not admit of a compliance with the prayer of very many of these petitions. It will be for the House to consider, in the first place, what is the amount of surplus revenue, after all the exigencies of the year have been provided for; and next, how that surplus can best be applied, and what tax it may be most expedient to repeal. It is admitted by one who is well acquainted with politics and mankind, that "to tax and to please, as to love and to be wise, is not given unto man." I must add, that the difficulty of imposing taxes is not so great as that of repealing one previous taxation. In proposing a new tax, there is generally only one class of objectors—that class whom the tax more particularly affects; but when we come to propose a repeal of a tax, then various contending classes of the community come forward, each prefers its particular claim for relief, and the conflict is fierce and formidable. We see the agriculturists arrayed in argument, though I hope not in interest, against the manufacturers; the manufacturers, in their turn, claiming relief in preference to the landholder; the inhabitants of cities and towns asserting that they bear the chief burthen of direct taxation, and are entitled to immediate attention; the trader and manufacturer soliciting the remission of those duties which repress the productive industry of the community. In a word, it is when we come to consider the repeal of a tax, that the great difficulty of finance appears. On former occasions, in financial statements it was usual—and I think it was prudent so to do—to refer to the financial transactions of past years, and to show the effects of former reductions and economical resources. I will not go over ground which I have already trod for this purpose. It is true that our duty should lead us to consider the reduction of expenditure, before we come to the reduction of taxation. Such reduction of expenditure is one of the first duties of a Government, and on it the repeal of taxation can most safely be based. I will not, I repeat, trouble the House, by re- ferring to the reductions made by the present Government, and that of Lord Grey in former years. These I have stated on former occasions, and I presume that those statements are still in the recollection of the House. The reductions made by the Whig Ministry are, I trust, at least, in the recollection of hon. Members on this side of the House, and cannot be undervalued even by those who are opposed to us. But there has been presented to Parliament, during the present Session, one document to which I cannot avoid adverting. It is a Return that has been laid on the Table of the House, not on my motion, and, therefore, it cannot be considered as prepared for the occasion; the Return I allude to was made on the motion of the hon. and and gallant Member for the city of Lincoln. I thank him for the evidence he has supplied—for the opportunity he has afforded me of calling the attention of the House to the facts contained in that most important account. I do not advert to it as claiming, for my side of the House, the exclusive merit of the reductions there shown; for I admit that hon. Gentlemen opposite are fully entitled to their share of the public approbation. Again thanking the hon. and gallant Officer for the opportunity he has afforded me, I proceed to call the attention of the House to some important general results. It appears from the Return, which I hold in my hand, that in the year 1815, the establishment of the several public departments consisted of 27,365 persons, whose salaries amounted to 3,763,300l. In the year 1835, the number of persons employed in the same departments had been reduced to 23,578, and the salaries to 2,786,000l.; showing a reduction of 3,797 in the number of persons employed, and a reduction of salaries to the amount of 976,000l. Though I do not mean to enter into any minute analysis of this account, I may be allowed to point the attention of the Committee to the several departments in which the most considerable reductions have been made. In the Treasury, the annual reductions have amounted to 27,000l.; and by a Bill which was brought in under Earl Grey's Government, of which my right hon. Friend, the Member for Cumberland, had the charge, a further annual reduction has been made in the charge of the Exchequer, to the amount of 58,000l. In the War-Office the reduction has been 29,000l.; in the Ordnance, 122,000l., in the Admiralty and Navy Offices, 30,300l.; in the Excise, 152,000l.; in the Stamps and Tax-Office, 1,031l.;; in the Audit-Office, 54,000l.; in the Vice-Treasurer's Office, (Ireland,) 23,000l. I do not mention this with the view of showing that all has been done in the way of reduction which can be done; on the contrary, I do it for the purpose of showing to the people of this country, that much has been already effected, and to encourage the House and the Government, the one to demand and the other to carry into effect, all practicable retrenchment, seeing that what has been already done in that way, has been effected without any detriment to the public service. But I hope, however, the House will see that the more that has been done in the way of reduction, the more difficult is it to effect what yet remains to do. The Government do not mean to shrink from this difficulty; and if any further reductions in the public departments, in the collection of the revenue, or in any branch of the public service, can be carried forward, the House may depend upon it that they will be effected. I now proceed to the detail of the income and expenditure; and, in the first place, to compare the estimate I made in August last, of the income of the present year, with the actual receipts of this year, closing with the 5th of April last. I do not adopt this course from any personal motive, or to claim any credit for the accuracy of my calculations; but it is necessary that the House should know whether the statements I then made are proved to have rested upon sufficient data, and were not lightly hazarded; in order that the public may judge how far they can rely on the probable accuracy of my future calculations, and on the estimate I form of the income and expenditure of the current year. I last year estimated the amount of the Customs' revenue of this year at 20,000,000l. The receipt has been no less than 20,550,000l.; thus exceeding my estimate more than 500,000l. The Excise was estimated at 13,270,000l.; the receipts amount to 13,440,000l.; making an increase of 170,000l. in that branch. I estimated the Stamps at 6,980,000l.; the Exchequer payments have been 7,051,000l.; making an increase beyond my estimate of 71,000l. The Post-Office revenue I estimated at 1,500,000l.; but the increase exceeds that estimate by 51,000l. Taxes I estimated as likely to produce 3,600,000l.; excess beyond that sum is 20,000l. The Miscellaneous Estimates have fallen short by 24,000l. of what I had anticipated. Thus, on the whole year, the receipts have exceeded the estimate by the sum of 830,000l. I have made this statement to show, that if I calculate the revenue of the next year on the same data, the House may not suspect that I take an exaggerated view of our present and future resources. I hope, then, that assuming the present state of the country to continue undisturbed—and on this subject I shall make some remarks hereafter—the Committee would not be in error in giving credit to the estimate I am about to state for the next year. I shall now proceed to compare my estimate of the expenditure of the year with the actual payments. I calculated the charges on the Consolidated Fund, and the interest of the public debt, exclusive of the West-India compensation, at 30,580,000l.; but the actual expenditure has been 30,714,000l.; making an excess beyond the estimate, of 134,000l.; the whole of which excess is capable of explanation. The estimated expense of the army was 6,189,000l.; the actual expenditure was 6,481,000l.; being an excess, above the estimate, of 292,000l. This excess arose out of the fact, that the payments made within the year are not always payments for the service of the year. Sometimes there is an overlapping of last year's vote to be defrayed; and at others there is an anticipation of the expenditure of the year ensuing. Since 1831, also, there have been no votes for army extraordinaries—a change which has been of considerable public advantage, and which has brought the whole financial accounts more minutely under the consideration of the House; but in consequence of this change, it sometimes becomes necessary that advances should be made for civil purposes out of the military chest in the colonies, to be repaid out of the miscellaneous vote; and this makes the expenditure of the military department appear greater than it really is. For instance—an advance has been made out of the military chest in the last year for the maintenance of convicts in New South Wales; but this sum will hereafter be re-paid out of the votes for convict purposes, But to proceed: the estimated expense of the navy last year was 4,245,000l., but the actual expenditure has been within that sum by 4,099l. The estimate for the Ordnance was 1,296,000l.; the expenditure has been 1,273,000l., the expenditure being less than the estimate by the sum of 23,000l. The estimate of the miscellaneous expenditure was 2,405,000l.; the actual expenditure does not exceed 2,202,000l. On the whole of the expenditure there has been an excess above the estimate of 80,000l. Such is the comparison between the estimated income and expenditure of last year, and the actual result of both in that year. I will now proceed to make a comparison of the receipts of last year, with the estimated receipt and expenditure of the present, still excluding the charges incurred by reason of the compensation to the owners of slaves. I have already shown that the receipts of last year amounted to 46,381,000l. I am enabled to calculate, and I hope I shall be able to justify the estimate, that the income of the present year, supposing that no alteration were made in taxation, would amount to 46,980,000l., showing an excess in the income of the present, as compared with the last year, of 599,900l.; or, in round numbers, 600,000l. The charge on the Consolidated Fund, and the interest of the National Debt, amounted last year to 30,714,000l. I estimate the amount this year at 30,620,000l., exclusive of the West-India loan in both cases. The army expenditure last year was 6,481,000l.; in the present year I estimate it at 6,327,000l. The navy last year was 4,098,000l.; this year, from political reasons which my noble Friend, the Secretary of State, has explained on former occasions to the House, there has been an increase in the navy to the amount of 434,000l.; thus raising the estimate of the year to 4,532,000l. The Ordnance Estimate last year was 1,273,000l.; in the present I estimate it at 1,263,000l. Last year the miscellaneous services amounted to 2,202,000l.; this year I estimate that branch of expenditure at 2,461,000l. This will show an increase of 420,000l., (exclusive of the West-India loan) on the expenditure of the whole year. I shall now endeavour to combine the results of the statements I have made, so as to bring the whole into the simplest and most intelligible form. The total income estimated for 1836 and 1837, was 46,980,000l.; the total expenditure for debt and other charges on Consolidated Fund, exclusive of the charge for West-India Loan, 30,620,000l.; the supplies for 1836 and 1837, 14,585,807l.; total expenditure, exclusive of charge for West-India Loan, 45,205,807l.; exhibiting a surplus of 1,774,193l. Gentlemen who have listened to this statement will no doubt rejoice—no one could desire more sincerely than myself—that such a disposable surplus existed. But such is not the case. The Legislature, having performed a great act of justice in providing compensation for the owners of the emancipated slaves, it has added 20,000,000l. to our debt, and it cannot have provided for the interest on the sum due to the planter, and at the same time have so large a surplus of revenue applicable to relief from taxation. With respect to the West-India Loan, I have, on various occasions, stated the liabilities which it has entailed on the country; and the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for the University of Cambridge, will recollect that in the course of last year, when he asked some questions concerning it, I gave him an account not only of our full liabilities, but of the amount we might be called on to pay in the course of the year. On that occasion, I stated, that if the whole amount were to be called for within the year, so far from there being any available surplus, there would be, on the contrary a deficiency. But I also stated, on that occasion, (and the House seemed to be satisfied with the declaration,) that I should make provision only for what were likely to be the probable demands upon the public. It was after making such provision, that I struck my balance, and stated the surplus which might be brought under the consideration of the House, with a view to the repeal of taxes. I mean to pursue the same course on the present occasion. The House is aware, that provision is yet to be made for compensation to the slave-owners of the Mauritius, and of the Cape of Good Hope; and that there further remains unsatisfied the difference between the sum of 15,000,000l., the nominal amount of the loan, and the actual amount received after deducting the discount. There is, also, a certain proportion of interest on claims not as yet admitted to adjudication. The maximum amount to be provided for, supposing the loan of the Mauritius and the Cape to be completed—supposing all demands liquidated, including the interest on claims outstanding for adjudication, as well as on those which have not, as yet, been put in—supposing, in fact, that whole interest were to be cleared up and paid off, in full, the utmost amount claimable in the year would be 1,454,604l. On the best consideration which I can give the subject, the actual payment which will be demanded, on the score of interest, I calculate to be 1,111,863l.; and I propose out of the surplus of 1,774,193l.; to make provision for this sum of 1,111,863l.; which I have every reason to believe will be the highest amount that can be demanded. I am thus bound to state, that the whole amount of surplus, over which Parliament is entitled to exercise any dominion, amounts to a sum not exceeding 662,330l. Gentlemen who think that we can apply a large surplus to the reduction of taxation, will do well to bear in mind this fact; they will be pleased to remember, that making a just provision for the engagements and services of the country, we cannot have a larger disposable surplus than 662,330l. Having said this much, I shall now call the attention of the House to the various branches of the income of the country, in order to enable the House to judge whether the calculations I have made are correct. I first examine the Customs' revenue, which I have calculated as likely to produce the same amount as the previous year. Let us consider the consumption of coffee, and the revenue produced from that article. The quantity which I last year estimated was 23,143,000 lbs.; but the actual amount of the year's consumption was 23,623,000 lbs. The consumption which I estimate for the year 1837 is 23,251,000 lbs. This I take as the average of the two years. In the article of sugar, I estimated, in 1835, the consumption for 1836 at 3,726,000 cwts.; the actual consumption has been 3,745,000 cwts. I assume the probable consumption of this year to be the same as the last. I estimated the consumption of tea at 36,000,000 lbs.; the actual consumption has been 37,099,000 lbs. The consumption of the year 1836 and 1837 I calculate at 38,000,000 lbs. This is an increase on which I trust that I am justified in reckoning; it is founded on the very considerable increase which has taken place in the consumption of that article. I am well aware, that, in discharging this branch of his duties, the Finance Minister is bound to avoid all exaggerated statements; and however great the desire on the part of that Minister to reduce taxes—as prudence demands that he should not justify such a proceeding by an over-statement of the probable future income of the country, so he is bound neither to gratify himself nor his friends by a proposition to repeal taxes, which the result may not enable him to realize. I shall next call the attention of the Committee to a more general view of the Customs' duties, as an indication of the general state of the commerce of the country; but I must caution the Committee against allowing the present condition of that commerce to betray them into any excess of confidence. I am well aware that nothing is more dangerous to a community like our's than the speculation and rashness which arises from a misplaced confidence in the continuance of a period of almost unexampled prosperity; it therefore requires the greatest caution and prudence in touching upon this subject. In making a statement of the finances of the country, I hope I may neither depart, nor encourage others to depart, from that calm and patient anticipation of futurity, which it behoves all, and more particularly a Finance Minister, to adhere to. This caution

thought, that the details into which the right hon. Gentleman had entered must be most gratifying to the House. No part of the statement had been more satisfactory to him (Mr. Hume) than that in which the right hon. Gentleman had pointed out the advantages which had arisen in consequence of the repeal of the duty upon beer. The right hon. Gentleman had stated, that the surplus revenue for the present year would amount to something more than 600,000l. But if there had not been what he (Mr. Hume) must still call a very unnecessary increase in the naval force of 5,000 seamen, there would have been a surplus of at least 1,000,000l., of which 400,000l. might have been applied to the general reduction of taxation. No reason whatever had yet been assigned for the increase of the naval force; and no one, he apprehended, would contend that a reduction of 400,000l. in the amount of taxation would not be hailed by the country as a great boon. It was not his intention at that moment to enter into the question of the tax upon newspapers, seeing that a much better opportunity would be afforded hereafter; but he could not abstain from stating, that he thought there were few other taxes which could be repealed with such great advantage. The right hon. Gentleman had stated many reasons in favour of that subject, but there were several other strong reasons which the right hon. Gentleman had not noticed. The right hon. Gentleman had alluded very properly to the unpopularity and difficulty which his predecessor, Lord Spencer, had to encounter in carrying the law into effect with respect to stamped publications, and it was also true that the steps taken to enforce the law had not been effectual. For two or three years past the prisons had been filled with victims to the tax upon newspapers. Upwards of 150 individuals had been imprisoned for selling unstamped papers; yet, notwithstanding the severity of the law, it was found that the sale of unstamped papers, instead of being diminished, was every day increasing. It was highly necessary, therefore, that a change should be made in the law upon this subject, with as little delay as possible. He must say, however, that he thought the right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not made a very fair statement as to the result which would follow the repeal of the duty on newspapers. Would the House, asked the right hon. Gentleman, submit to the reduction of 400,000l on newspapers only, out of a surplus of revenue amounting to only 600,000l. That was not a fair statement, because the reduction of the duty would not, in fact, be 400,000l. The increase in the sale of newspapers arising from the repeal of the tax, would lead to a corresponding increase in the productiveness of the duty upon paper, and this, added to the optional penny-post tax which it was proposed to continue upon newspapers transmitted through the post-office, would, in his opinion, be nearly sufficient to supply the deficiency occasioned by the repeal of the stamp duty. But he would leave the further discussion of this topic until the proposition was brought forward (which it most assuredly would be) for the total repeal of the stamp-duty on newspapers. Quitting that subject, then, he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he did not think that the whole of the duty upon glass ought to be repealed? He wished the right hon. Gentleman to be honest upon that point. He wished the right hon. Gentleman would state what was the cost of collecting the small amount of duty on that article which was still continued. He wished the right hon. Gentleman would state whether the whole amount of the revenue derived from that particular source much exceeded the cost of collecting it. If it did exceed the cost of collection at all, he was quite satisfied that the excess was not so great as to warrant a continuation of the tax With regard to the stamp duties generally, he hoped, when the proper time came, the right hon. Gentleman would he prepared to state that he contemplated a material reduction; because, as he (Mr. Hume) had been informed, a considerable amount would be gained to the revenue by a reduction. If there were a stamp duty that required reduction more than any other, it was undoubtedly the stamp on marine insurances. That tax was not only bad in itself, but it was the cause of driving the profit and advantage of marine insurance from the shores of England, and of transferring it to the maritime countries of the Continent. It had besides an injurious effect upon the general commerce of the country. The impolicy and injustice of this tax had, however, been so well pointed out by the hon. Member for Worcester, that he (Mr. Hume) should not think it necessary to say more upon the subject on that occasion. The right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, seemed to look with dreadful apprehension at the spirit of speculation which now pervaded the country. He (Mr. Hume) confessed that he had no fears upon that score. As long as the Bank of England continued to be conducted on the principles upon which it was now governed there need be no apprehension of a crisis or of a panic. Had that establishment been conducted on the same principle in 1825, there would have been no crisis, perhaps no panic, at that time. He was quite satisfied that the banking system throughout the country was in a sound and healthy state, and as long as banks were compelled to pay their notes in gold, on demand, there could be no just ground for apprehension or alarm. At the same time, he should be sorry to see the people, generally running into such wild schemes, as, unfortunately, there were sometimes instances of. If, at the present moment, any such schemes existed, he believed that in the course of a very few months there would be an end to them. He wished that the right hon. Gentleman had taken the trouble to bring before the House the great increase which had taken place in the import of almost every article on which there had been a decrease of duty. The increase on some of these articles was perfectly enormous. This he thought should hold out an encouragement to the House to reduce all those taxes which had been imposed during the war, and the continuance of which operated in a direct and powerful manner to check and impede the commerce and manufactures of the country.

begged to say one or two words in reply to some of the observations which had fallen from the hon. Member for Middlesex. That hon. Gentleman had asked why he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not repeal the whole of the duty on glass? In reply to that question he could only state, that the general principle upon which he had acted was to reduce the duty to such a rate as not injuriously to press upon any particular manufacture, but at the same time to continue so much of it as, by an increased consumption of the article manufactured, should make up for the deficiency which would otherwise be occasioned in the revenue. There was one other topic to which he wished to refer. The hon. Gentleman seemed to think that the observations which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had made with respect to the spirit of speculation which at present existed, implied an apprehension on his part of some impending calamity. That was not the case. But if in referring to the general prosperity which now seemed to pervade the country, he had not at the same time stated that which he believed to be true, that there were circumstances connected with the spirit of speculation now generally abroad which ought not to create apprehension or alarm, but to excite the attention and vigilance of Parliament—if he had not done this, he thought he might very fairly be accused of having neglected an important part of the duty which attached to one filling his important and responsible situation.

intended to conform to what appeared to be the general feeling of the House, and to what he considered the best practical mode of dealing with the subject before them, and to abstain from entering into any detail on the various points which the right hon. Gentleman had suggested with respect to the repeal of duties, until each individual subject was brought in a proper shape before them. He knew from experience, that the attention of that House would never be given to any question which was not brought before it in a palpable and tangible shape; and, therefore, if upon that ground alone, he should forbear from entering into the various questions to which the right hon. Gentleman had referred. There was, however, one part of the right hon. Gentleman's speech upon which he thought he might be excused for making one or two observations, because a subsequent opportunity of doing so would not be afforded him. With the views which he entertained upon the Report, he thought it particularly desirable that whenever they had before them the financial statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and when they were called upon to consider how they should deal with the surplus, and what amount of surplus should be allowed to remain—when these matters were brought under their consideration, he always thought it advisable to remind the House, that in addition to the duty which was imposed upon them of giving the utmost relief in their power to the suffering of any particular class, or to the pressure upon any particular class arising from taxation, they had yet a duty more urgent, in his view, and one from which they ought never for a moment to shrink—that of considering the necessity of providing, not only for present means and present convenience, but of regarding what was the state of that great debt which pressed upon the country, lightly now, perhaps, in moments of ease and comparative prosperity, but which, in more difficult and tempestuous times, if not properly attended to now, might press upon the nation with a weight scarcely to be supported. If he found any fault with the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, it was that he had passed over all reference to that question in one single sentence, and merely told the House that the National Debt had undergone a reduction by the conversion of it into terminable annuities. He was not opposed to that conversion, but when they looked back, as they ought to do, at this mode of dealing with the debt, they must bear in mind how small a proportion the terminable annuities bore to the mass of the debt with which they had to deal; and they must also take into view, that whilst they considered the reduction of the funded debt, they must not forget the annual increase of the unfunded debt. Having before him the finance accounts for the last five years, he had taken the trouble to draw out a statement of the progress which, during that period, had been made in the reduction of the debt. He found from those papers, that in 1831 the total charge of all the debt, including the interest on the funded debt, what was paid of terminable annuities, and what paid for unfunded debt, amounted in round numbers to 28,350,000l. In 1836, taking the account which had that day been printed, and placed in their hands, and which, perhaps, did not present an exact analogy, being made up to the quarter ending in January instead of that ending in April, but which he was obliged to resort to, having no other—by that account, he observed, that the total amount of the charge of the debt last year was 28,784,000l., being an increase in the charge of the debt since the year 1831, of upwards of 400,000l.; and this increased sum did not include the annual interest on the West-Indian loan. This increase in the charge of the debt, too, it must be observed, had taken place, notwithstanding the advantages which the Government had enjoyed since the year 1831, of relieving the country of an annual burden of 50,000l., by a reduction of the Four per Cents.; and also by another obtained from the altered bargain with the Bank of England of 100,000l. With all these advantages they were now about 450,000l. worse than they were in the year 1831. This was a point to which he thought the attention of the House ought always to be directed. They had been constantly, and were still constantly, in the habit of issuing annually an augmentation of exchequer bills, and thence, in a great degree, arose the increased charge, which he was anxious to point out, in order that steps might he taken for its reduction. He wished the House not to be led away by a notion that the receipts were so much above the expenditure. It might be said, which he admitted, that part of the increase arose from the conversion of interminable into terminable annuities. But there was little consolation to be derived from that. In 1831 the unfunded debt amounted to 25,600,000l. In the present year it amounted to about 29,000,000l., being an increase, since the year 1831, of 3,400,000l. He begged the House to understand, that he did not wish to interfere with the course which the Government adopted in issuing exchequer bills; but what he contended for was this, that as the re-payments came back, the House ought to see that they were applied to the reduction of the debt. Then, with respect to the terminable annuities. In the year 1831 the quantity of terminable annuities amounted to 3,300,000l. At the present period it appeared that they amounted to 4,070,000l., being an increase of very nearly 700,000l. He (Mr. Goulburn) thought, that in that statement of facts, which, as far as the papers upon the table of the House could hear him out, he would undertake to say, was a fair and correct one; there were circumstances which called upon the House to exercise the greatest caution in dealing with any surplus which the Chancellor of the Exchequer might contemplate. He thought the present the proper moment to make a statement of this description, in order that before they came to the discussion of the various repeals of taxation which were to be proposed to them, they might bear in mind how those repeals would operate with regard to the views which he had taken of the subject. He hoped, also, that if some hon. Gentlemen were disposed individually to press for the reduction of particular taxes, they would not forget the increase of the debt, which he had endeavoured to bring under their consideration. With respect to any other part of the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, he had only to join in what appeared to be the general feeling, that there was an existing state of prosperity in the country which called for mutual congratulation, but which he thought, with the right hon. Gentleman, was not such as would warrant any exuberant liberality in dealing with the finances of the country. He thought with the right hon. Gentleman, that they would be dealing much more prudently if for the next year they calculated upon a less prosperous state than that which had sprung up between the last and the present year. Having adverted to these, which were the main points pressing on his mind, he had now only to refer for a moment to a matter which partook somewhat more of a personal character, and which arose out of a conversation which took place between the right hon. Gentleman and himself on a former occasion, when he (Mr. Goulburn) presented a petition to the House on the subject of the proposed reduction of the newspaper stamp. He (Mr. Goulburn) did not then propose to enter into the question of whether the reduction of that duty would be proper or improper—he would not even advert to the point which he was anxious to bring under the consideration of the House when he presented the peti- tion—all that he wished to do was, to reply to an observation then made by the right hon. Gentleman. The right hon. Gentleman was understood to accuse the petitioners with unfairness in coming before the House with such a complaint as that stated in their petition, having had a communication with him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) on the subject of the proposed limitation of the size of newspapers, and he having reason to believe that they were satisfied with the limitation he proposed. Since the statement of the right hon. Gentleman had gone abroad, he (Mr. Goulburn) had received letters upon the subject from several of the petitioners. He had one from the editor and printer of the Times, in which they stated that they neither directly nor indirectly had agreed to any proposition for restricting the size of any newspapers, or authorised or deputed any one to communicate with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the subject. He had also a letter from the editor and printer of The Morning Post, couched in similar terms. Neither directly nor indirectly had they been concerned in the proposed measure for limiting the size of newspapers. He (Mr. Goulburn) thought it but just that the right hon. Gentleman should know the declaration of those gentlemen on the subject of their having been parties to any propositions for altering the size of newspapers; and he therefore took the earliest opportunity of communicating to him the contents of the letters he had received. But before he quitted this subject, he must be permitted to make a few observations on the personalities in which the right hon. Gentleman indulged the other night with respect to himself. The right hon. Gentleman taxed him, with considerable warmth, for having presented a petition on the subject of limiting the size of newspapers, in utter oblivion of his own recorded sentiments upon the subject; and the right hon. Gentleman quoted a paragraph from a Bill which had been in the Stamp-office, and which was left by him (Mr. Goulburn) in the Treasury, in which, undoubtedly, there did stand a clause for reducing the size of newspapers to within certain limits. At the time that the right hon. Gentleman read that paragraph, he (Mr. Goulburn) was so little aware of ever having intended to adopt such a limitation, that the first impulse of his mind was to give a direct and positive contradiction to the statement. But supposing that the right hon. Gentleman had thoroughly in- vestigated the subject, and that his (Mr. Goulburn's) own memory must have totally failed him upon the subject, he allowed it for the moment to pass by. But when he referred to the schedule of duties placed by him on the table of the House in 1830, he found that, so far from a limitation of the size of newspapers, he adopted in that schedule the provisions of the Act of Parliament introduced by Mr. Huskisson, making no limitation whatever, but giving relief to those who published separate papers as supplements, and giving further relief to those whose papers consisted entirely of advertisements. The schedule thus laid on the table contained that record of opinion upon the subject by which he was bound to stand. The Bill from which the right hon. Gentleman had quoted was not, in fact, before the House—it was in draft; and he certainly did not expect—indeed, he did not think it either right or courteous, that a public officer, filling the same situation which he (Mr. Goulburn) had once the honour to hold, should avail himself of such means to lead the House to suppose that his opinions were different at one moment to what they were at another. [The Chancellor of the Exchequer: The Bill was in print.] He knew that. It was printed, but printed how? Not by order of the House; but printed in draft. When it was brought to him in manuscript, it was so long and so painful to read that he begged to have it printed draft-wise, and in that state it was that it must have fallen into the hands of the right hon. Gentleman. The Bill was never brought forward; and he begged to state now, once for all, that there were propositions in it, as it was originally drawn and submitted to him, in which he could not concur. If the right hon. Gentleman meant to make the quotation from the Bill a charge against him, it was really one of a more serious nature than he seemed to think. The right hon. Gentleman charged him with an intention of imposing a duty on newspapers according to their size. If that were really his intention, how fraudulently must he have dealt with the House, having presented to the House a schedule upon the subject, and in that schedule having said nothing whatever about the intended restriction. But he would not dwell longer upon the subject. He thought, however, that the House would agree with him, that whatever argument the right hon. Gentleman had derived from reference to a Bill printed in draft, was worth nothing. At all events, he appealed from the Bill to the schedule which he had laid upon the table of the House. The opinion expressed in the schedule upon the subject he should be prepared, when the proper time arrived, to maintain, and to show that the mode in which the right hon. Gentleman proposed to deviate from what took place in 1830 with respect to newspapers, was not advisable for the press, nor desirable for the country. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by again directing the attention of the House to the necessity of providing for the reduction of the national debt, before it sought for the application of any great amount of surplus to the reduction of taxation.

concurred generally in the views taken by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and was happy to find that, notwithstanding the reduction of 8,000,000l. of taxation within the last few years, there would still, but for the amount of interest payable on the money voted for the emancipation of the negroes, have been a clear surplus for the present year, of not less than 1,000,000l. The right hon. Gentleman had, in the course of his observations on the excellent working of the principle of free trade alluded to the importation of French wines; but it did not appear to him that a greater failure, as a financial measure, than that of the equalisation of the duties on French wines, either in the way of producing an increased consumption, or of inducing a disposition on the part of the French Government to adopt reciprocal measures, had ever taken place. As a commercial man he thanked the right hon. Gentleman for the very salutary remarks he had made as to the necessity of caution on the part of those engaged in trade. He did not take any desponding views of the present state of the country; nor did he anticipate any reaction; at the same time it was the duty of a financial Minister to remind the country that by possibility some check might be given to the present prosperity, which arose in part, he was afraid, from over speculation. The right hon. Gentleman estimated that the stamp duties would produce next year 7,000,000l. whereas this year they only produced 6,900,000l.; and yet he proposed a reduction in that duty of upwards of 200,000l. How could the right hon. Gentleman entertain this expectation, unless he anticipated to make up the difference by his arrangements in the new Stamp Act? There was hardly one clause in that Bill which did not call for the serious consideration of the House before they consented to it. The right hon. Gentleman had said, that whenever a tax became unproductive, it was in itself an evidence of the impolicy of the tax. Now he had stated yesterday, that although the trade and commerce of the country had gone on increasing, yet the produce of the stamp duty on marine insurances had decreased. He therefore hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would take the subject into his consideration, and propose some reduction of that tax. After all, it appeared that the only reduction of taxes proposed were those on newspapers, on glass, and on paper. He certainly would never ask for a reduction of taxes below the amount of available surplus revenue, and as other opportunities would be afforded, he would not now do more than generally express his satisfaction with the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman, and a hope that the resources of the country would go on so improving as to admit of a further reduction of taxation, by which its industry and commerce might be promoted.

intended to follow the example so wisely set by the Gentlemen who had spoken in the course of this slight discussion, because he thought it exceedingly wise to interpose some interval between hearing the financial statement of a Minister of the Crown, from which they ascertained the amount of surplus revenue that could be fairly applied in the reduction of taxation, and of pronouncing any conclusive opinion in debate, as to the taxes which ought to be selected for reduction. Assuming that there were 500,000l. or 600,000l., which might be fairly applied in the remission of taxes, he should like to have an opportunity of referring to the very valuable information collected by the Commissioners of Inquiry into the state of the Excise Laws, for the purpose of forming a comparative view of the whole subject of taxation, and of ascertaining by what mode they might avail themselves of the small amount of surplus in the most effectual manner, for the purpose of decreasing the burdens of the people, and of increasing the productive industry of the country. The glass duty, the paper duty, the soap duty, and one other duty which had not been adverted to by the right hon. Gentleman, but which he (Sir Robert Peel) should be glad to have the opportunity of fully considering—namely, the duty levied upon the importation of raw cotton—all these various points he should now avoid pronouncing any opinion upon; but having made up his mind as to the surplus available, he should at a future opportunity give his opinion as to what were the taxes most prudent to reduce. He felt the force of the observation made by his right hon. Friend (Mr. Goulburn), that in time of peace we were not making any rapid progress in the reduction of the funded debt; while we were increasing our unfunded debt, which, in a time of difficulty, might press with peculiar severity upon the country. These were considerations which ought never to escape the attention of that House; and before the House dealt too liberally with respect to a surplus revenue, he hoped that those subjects would engage their serious attention. With regard to the duty on the importation of raw cotton, he would just state, that in the year ending 5th April, 1835, the duty collected upon that article, which undoubtedly was one of the main sources of the prosperity of the country, amounted to 374,000l.; and in the year ending the 5th April, 1836, the amount levied was 400,000l.; the rate of duty being, he believed, only five-sixteenths of a penny per 1b. But it behoved the House to bear in mind that the manufacturers of this country were exposed—and so long as peace continued, they would be exposed—to vigorous foreign competition. He, therefore, would say, that to levy such a duty as 400,000l. upon a raw material which formed the staple of our chief manufactures, was most unwise. On the one hand no advantage could be gained from so small a revenue; on the other, it would be most dearly purchased if by retaining it. we should increase the advantages of an increasing and successful competition by foreign countries. With his views as to the necessity of maintaining public credit inviolate, and as to the impolicy of making no provision whatever for the interruption of that prosperity the country was now enjoying, and deprecating as he did the approach to that state of things by which they might encumber themselves with a new debt, he could not certainly press for the remission of the whole tax upon raw cotton; but he should rejoice to see its amount reduced as low as possible, so as not to encourage unnecessarily any competition in that important branch of trade. He also wished to reserve to himself an opportunity of considering whether, in dealing with so small an amount of surplus revenue, it might not be better to remit the duty altogether on one article, than to make a remission of a portion of the duty on two or more articles; whether, for instance, the total abolition of all excise regulations with respect to glass might not lead to a great extension of the manufacture of that useful article in this country; and whether that might not be a new and an abundant source of wealth, by our becoming manufacturers of an article which was now chiefly manufactured by other countries. There was one point to which he thought his right hon. Friend (Mr. Goulburn) had intended to call the attention of the House—the policy of increasing the exportation of beer. There did seem to be a prospect of a very great increase in that branch of our export trade; and whether it might not be further increased by some regulation with respect to allowing a drawback, was worthy of consideration. He differed from the hon. Member for Middlesex as to the impolicy of the observation made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in that tone of caution and warning which he assumed when speaking of the present state of prosperity in the country. It was infinitely more becoming the station of a finance Minister to adopt the language and tone of caution, than the tone and language of unbounded confidence. At the same time, he saw great cause for congratulation in the present state of the manufacturing industry of the country. He believed that our present prosperity stood in general upon stable foundations, while peace continued with foreign countries; and particularly if there were any hope of the South American provinces being restored to a state of quiet and tranquillity, he could not but think that, with the elastic spirit of industry and enterprise in this country, there was a reasonable prospect of the continuance of a great part of our present prosperity. But, at the same time, he certainly thought there were indications which would lead prudent men to doubt whether the whole of that prosperity was sound, or whether the activity which was now everywhere displayed, was necessarily connected with a safe and permanent state of things. It was impossible to see the rapid and universal rise in the price of every article of consumption, without asking the question—to what was that to be attributed? It was impossible to take up some of the newspapers—he particularly referred to some Liverpool papers—without witnessing a rage for the formation of joint-stock companies, having for their professed objects matters exceeding in absurdity those of the joint-stock companies of the year 1825. He had seen prospectuses put forth in a Liverpool paper of schemes which completely astonished him, proceeding as they did from a place so eminent in the commercial world, so noted for the astuteness of its inhabitants, especially that class who there carried on commercial affairs. Projects have been put forth by commercial men for carrying on manufactures and other commercial speculations by means of joint-stock companies, which could only be carried on with success when directed by individual enterprise, and with a view to individual profit. Coupling these two facts together—an universal rise in prices of all articles of consumption, and this tendency not merely to an ordinary kind of speculation, but to similar mad projects to those which prevailed in the year 1825—without feeling any cause of despondency, or any undue anxiety, yet he thought those were but acting the part of prudent men who, in time, made use of words of caution from prudential motives. There were two circumstances which ought not altogether to escape the notice of the House. One was a measure which, when first introduced, he strongly opposed—which he knew was adopted with the single view, and not perhaps unwisely, of meeting a memorable commercial crisis—namely, the measure which relieved the country banks from paying their notes above 5l. in gold, and permitting them to exchange their paper for the paper of the Bank of England. While he admitted, that supposing a crisis arose, much of the evil of the crisis might be obviated by giving such permission; yet he always feared that the measure itself had a tendency to precipitate that crisis. Therefore, he for one witnessed the adoption of that permission with some anxiety and some alarm. Now, whether the principle upon which the joint-stock banks were established was perfectly sound or not, he was not prepared to say; but it did so happen, that coincident with all sorts of speculation, the multiplication of joint-stock banks throughout the country had taken place. Nothing could be so unjust as any inquisitorial interference with the private transactions of commercial men; but he thought, that as regarded these joint-stock banks, the legislature had a full right to require that there should be some general regulation established as to the principles upon which those banks should be conducted. Whether or not the habit of granting accommodation to the partners of those banks by issues of their own notes, was perfectly consistent with the commercial interests of the country, was a question which might be well deserving of consideration. He was aware at the same time that what might tend to diminish his anxiety was the present state of the foreign exchanges. Whether or not they ought to consider the state of foreign exchanges as a real test of soundness in a time of general commercial confidence and prosperity, whether they acted with sufficient rapidity, and were an infallible guide, was a point upon which he was not prepared to pronounce any decisive opinion. We were now proceeding with a flowing tide and a favourable wind, and every thing appeared prosperity and happiness; but we should bear in mind that in all times, even apart from those factitious causes which might be now increasing our prosperity, the commercial history of this country showed that we were subject to vicissitudes arising from excessive speculation; and when that period should ar-rive—if ever it did arrive—he was sure we should not feel regret that in a time of general exultation and general quiet, there were some found amongst us who, not desponding, not in the least despairing—nay, believing that a great portion of our prosperity did rest upon stable and solid foundations—yet did, from prudential considerations, warn the House and the country that that prosperity might not be permanent, and that, interspersed with solid causes of prosperity, there might be others upon which it was not safe to rest. He would not dwell upon this subject, but without advising their entering into an inquiry of an inquisitorial nature, or which might interfere with that free agency which was essentially necessary to the general prosperity of a commercial nation, yet he thought that it was perfectly consistent with that principle that the legisla- ture should inquire whether the banks of issue, exercising as they did one of the royal prerogatives, were conducted upon principles of safety to the interests of the country at large.

thought that caution and prudence were above all things necessary at the present time, in order that the existing prosperity of the country might be maintained, and that we might not see it succeeded by similar scenes to those that took place in 1825. It was impossible not to be struck with the spirit of speculation that now existed in the country; but he believed that there was a great difference between the present state of things and what took place in 1825. The spirit of speculation was then turned to foreign adventure of the most extraordinary description; but now speculation was directed to home objects; which if pushed too far might be very mischievous, though the consequences might not be quite so mischievous as in 1825; but, really, on turning to any newspaper, or to any price current, and observing the advertisements of joint-stock companies upon every possible subject, however unfit to be carried on in the present state of society, any man must be struck with astonishment at the fever which raged at this moment for those speculations. He felt it his duty some time ago to direct a register to be kept, taking the names merely from the London and a few country newspapers, of the different joint-stock companies, and of the nominal amount of capital proposed to be embarked in them. The nominal capital to be raised by subscriptions amounted to nearly 200,000,000l. and the number of companies was between 300 and 400. His right hon. Friend just now reminded him of the speculation in France for making beet-root sugar; but that was a sound speculation compared to some of those mentioned in his list. The first was the British Agricultural Loan Company, with a capital of 2,100,000l. He had been furnished with a blank corn note, issued by this company, which ran in these terms:—

"Exchange. British Agricultural Loan Company. Ten quarters English wheat. London. 18 No. I promise to deliver on demand, to the order of ten quarters of wheat, weighing lbs. per bushel, from the county of and the growth of 18, warehoused on the of 18 in sillo on which all charges have been paid up to the 18 20l. standard value. For the Governor and Directors of the British Agricultural Loan Company. Entered Storekeeper. Secretary."

Another company was proposed for supplying rain-water. Then there was the Patent Steam-paddle Company, with a capital of 30,000l.; the Safety Cabriolet Company, capital 100,000l.; the British and American Intercourse Company, capital 2,000,000l.; the London Whale Fishery Company, capital 600,000l. And then, to show the way these companies were starting up, for objects either of the most absurd kind, or for objects which private individuals were perfectly able to accomplish, he found the Liverpool British and Foreign Trading Company, capital 250,000l.. His noble Friend opposite knew perfectly well, that it was not at all an unusual thing for an individual in Liverpool to embark 250,000l. as a capital in foreign trade; and there were many who had a great deal more engaged in that business. Seeing these things, it appeared to him that the people of this country, having their minds recalled to notions of prudence and caution, was a likely means to put a stop to the evils that must otherwise flow from this state of things. He knew that these companies had not their origin only in London. In 1825, London was the great centre of speculation; but he was afraid that these companies now took their rise in other parts of the country. The right hon. Baronet had referred to a Liverpool paper. He (Mr. P. Thomson) was afraid that the place he represented (Manchester) could furnish as many instances of schemes for objects which could never be beneficial to any one, and in which the parties would only be throwing away their money. The fact was, that the greater part of these companies were got up by speculators, for the purpose of selling their shares. They brought up the shares to a premium, and then sold them, leaving the unfortunate purchasers, who were foolish enough to vest their money in them, to shift as they could. These speculations ought to be checked, otherwise great mischief would ensue from the odium which would be thrown on those joint-stock companies that were a national good. It was well known that most of the great undertakings that had of late years characterised this country, had been achieved by the enterprising spirit of individuals forming themselves into joint-stock companies. Therefore, he felt anxious that the good accruing from companies of this description should not be lost by the discouragement which the setting on foot of these mad and foolish schemes must ultimately occasion to joint-stock companies of real merit. The right hon. Baronet had referred to the state of the joint-stock banks. He (Mr. P. Thomson) had seen also, with great regret, the extent to which joint-stock banks had sprung up in different parts of the country. He believed great good had arisen from joint-stock banks, but the observations he had made with regard to other companies were equally applicable to many of the joint-stock banks that were springing up in different parts of the country, and the existence of which could only be attended with great mischief. He had a prospectus of what was called the English, Irish, and Scotch Joint-Stock Bank, with a proposed capital of three millions in England, two millions in Ireland, and two millions in Scotland; and which held out the greatest possible advantages to the parties engaged in it. The shares too were of very small amount. Indeed, on this point, he had seen some companies with shares as low as 10l. The great danger of evil arising from speculations of this kind was obvious. But even in those joint-stock banks which were good, and could conduct their business properly, and which had an immense amount of capital laid up, as well as almost inexhaustible credit, there was, he believed, a new element introduced since the last discussions they had had upon this subject, which they must not lose sight of; but which he confessed he knew not how to correct, except through the prudence and greatest caution of the parties themselves. What he meant was this. Parliament had been in the habit of considering it their duty to look most cautiously to banks of issue; but banks of deposit were not thought likely to lead to mischief; and, therefore, that they did not require to be rendered subject to parliamentary control. In fact, there appeared to be little chance of laying any restriction upon their proceedings. He believed that that opinion was correct; but it was subject to this observation, that Parliament looked for security to the prudence and caution of the parties themselves, and to their managing their business upon what he (Mr. P. Thomson) considered to be alone the sound principle for conducting a bank of deposit, namely, of dealing with the capital of their depositors, not their own, and not speculating upon the credit which they might enjoy. Now, a new element had certainly sprung up; and he believed that a great deal was done by these establishments in the way of discounting their own credit. The bills which came into them from their customers, were discounted at a much higher rate of interest than as compared with what would be charged in London, when passing with the credit of an endorsement by a joint-stock bank; and thus a much larger proportion of those bills found currency than would be the case under another system. To that might be attributed, in some degree, the circumstance which they now saw existing—namely, high prices, and the support which was given to the spirit of speculation in the country, unaccompanied as it was with any large increase of issue, either from the country banks of issue, or, in London, by the Bank of England itself. This, in his opinion, was not a safe state of things. As long as the country should go on prosperously, as long as prices kept rising, as long as the first utterer of these bills was able to meet his engagements, so long no disturbance would take place. But let there be a fall of prices, and then, he believed, the penalty which the country would have to sustain, by the encouragement of this false system, would be very great indeed. He believed, that to a certain extent, these banks did great good; but pushed as they were now to so extreme a degree of competition, he was apprehensive that considerable mischief would ensue. He hoped, however, that the prudence and caution of those parties who had so much to lose, would prevent the occurrence of mischief. He confessed, that he regarded, as of much more importance, the system of which he had been speaking, carried, as it had been, to so great an extent, owing to the competition of the joint-stock banks, than the circumstance alluded to by the right hon. Baronet—namely, the regulation under the law for making 5l. notes the limit of issues. He thought if any adversity were to arise, the country would then feel the full benefit of that measure.

agreed in much of that which the right hon. Gentleman had said on the subject of the mischievous effects which the errors of over-speculation were calculated to produce; but he at the same time thought it should be borne in mind that these errors and blunders were always the necessary and almost unavoidable consequence of a state of things in which enterprise was sure to be too speculative; but there never could be any great and unusual extension of the productive industry of the country unaccompanied by these results. He could not help thinking, however, that much of this cause of complaint arose from defective legislation, and that the time of the right hon. Gentleman, and the attention of the House, might be much more profitably employed in endeavouring to amend the system on which the financial concerns of the country were conducted, than in making unavailing complaints of unavoidable evils. Nor could he avoid adverting to the very extraordinary tone which had been adopted in the course of this debate, as regarded the state of the commercial transactions of the country. It seemed to be assumed that, as compared with countries on the Continent, this country was not prosperous, and that there was at present no secure basis for the very limited degree of prosperity we enjoyed. He, on the other hand, thought that the greater part of the prosperity of the country rested on the surest and most stable foundation—that of the prudence and spirit of enterprise inherent in the community; and he was also of opinion that this spirit of enterprise, if left to itself, uninterfered with by bad financial regulations, would secure a continuance of that prosperity, fixed upon a basis which no merely temporary causes of fluctuation could possibly affect. He thought, there- fore, that hon. Gentlemen opposite, rather than spend their time in enumerating the errors into which the commercial spirit of the people had led them, had better set about framing some more beneficial financial system. He did not so much oppose the arguments which the right hon. Gentleman had used, or the facts he had stated, as he disputed the inferences which he had drawn from them—inferences which he had thought the right hon. Gentleman would not have leant himself to. The right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer had entered into a variety of statements, for the purpose of showing, that increased internal prosperity was to be inferred from the increase in exports. He was of opinion that the amount of exports was a very bad test of the commercial advantages derived by the exporters; the real question was, what profit had the people who made the exports received upon them? Increased exportation was proof of increased production certainly; but the amount of importation in return must be looked to in order to ascertain the commercial balance of the transaction. If the amount of exports were to be expressed by sixteen millions, and the amount of imports by four millions, there would be very good ground for the inference of the right hon. Gentleman, that increased exportation was proof of increased production; but he (Mr. Attwood) would require to know what had become of the twelve millions forming the difference, and what advantage the country had derived from an increased export, unaccompanied by a corresponding import? Without then delaying the House, he would only say, that he thought the right hon. Gentleman's view of the exports of the country being a criterion of prosperity, was based on delusion.

would not be tempted by any thing that had occurred in the course of the debate, to enter into the general question of the currency; more especially as the House appeared very anxious for the termination of the discussion. He very much regretted that the right hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, was no longer in his place. The right hon. Baronet had confirmed the few hints which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had thrown out—not of alarm and distrust, but of caution and prudence; and it afforded him the highest gratification to find that, in the course which he had felt it his duty to pursue, in this part of his statement, he had been supported by the authority of the right hon. Baronet. He entirely concurred with the right hon. Baronet in his estimate of the advantage the country would derive from the repeal of the duty on raw cotton, supposing the state of its revenue admitted of such a reduction. There was not one word of what had fallen from the right hon. Baronet on this point in which he did not fully concur; but however desirable he might deem such a reduction to be, he could not, with the amount of surplus he had that night announced, take upon himself the responsibility of proposing it. He wished to say one word, in the next place, with reference to what had fallen from his hon. Friend, the Member for Worcester (Mr. Robinson), relative to the Stamp Act, because he knew that if observations coming from such a quarter, remained uncontradicted, they would obtain a considerable degree of currency. The hon. Gentleman seemed to think that the effect of the various details of the Bill would be to add greatly to the whole amount of duty paid. Now, he had brought the fact to a pretty fair test, with reference to one head of revenue at least, and he begged his hon. Friend's attention to the statement he was about to make, because it bore directly upon his argument. He held in his hand an account of the whole amount of stamp duty on bills paid by a very considerable house in the city of London, for one year; and on the other side he had a statement of the exact amount which would have been paid had the regulations he now proposed been in force. Under the old Act, the amount was 1,214l. 18s.; under the new one, it would have been 1,196l. 10s. 4d. He would now entreat the attention of the House to a little personal matter between his right hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Goul-burn) and himself, which, like all other matters between them, could only be discussed with feelings of mutual good will and regard. His right hon. Friend had adverted to two points:—the one, his own intentions in the year 1830 with respect to the size of newspapers; and the other, the transactions which had lately occurred between himself and the members of the press. He would take each of these points in its turn. His right hon. Friend, he was quite sure, would not suspect him of converting any official information that came within his reach to an uncandid purpose, or of using it in an uncandid manner. But when he had put into his hand a printed copy of an intended Act of Parliament, it would have been the very last thing to enter his mind that it was to be treated as a confidential communication in any shape whatever; more especially as in framing the Bill he had referred to the right hon. Gentleman's labours on the subject, and to the Bills which were in progress at the time of his leaving office. Until his right hon. Friend stated it himself, he could not have believed that he had altered his mind with respect to fixing a limitation of the size of the paper, because the schedule which was annexed to his right hon. Friend's proposed Bill, although it did contain particular provisions with respect to the supplement, they were certainly not the provisions which Mr. Huskisson proposed. [Mr. Goulburn: Yes, they were.] He could not conceive how that could be, because Mr. Huskisson proposed no limitation whatever; whereas, his right hon. Friend's clause applied to a supplement containing a certain number of advertisements, and sold at a particular price; and it contained an enactment specially limiting the size of the paper itself. With these documents before him, he could not suppose that his right hon. Friend had abandoned the intention embodied in them, until he heard it announced by himself. The Act of 1824 limited the size of the papers to 32 inches by 20, but Mr. Huskisson removed that restriction, and allowed newspapers to be printed on paper of any size. Now, in the schedule of his right hon. Friend there was a certain restriction—not with respect to the contents of the supplements, but to the size of the sheets on which they were to be printed, which was specially limited and controlled by the enacting clause of the bill which he then had before him. After the explanation of his right hon. Friend, he could entertain no doubt of his having abandoned this intention, and of his having determined not to bring in the Bill in the shape he originally contemplated. The next point involved a matter of private and individual faith, and he therefore entreated the patient attention of the House. On a former occasion, when the petition of the newspaper proprietors was presented, he took upon himself to express the very great surprise he felt at the course adopted by the individuals who had signed it, because he had been in communication with those individuals throughout the whole proceedings, and because every suggestion upon which he had acted had been adopted with their knowledge. Now, an utter denial had been given to this assertion, and his right hon. Friend had repeated that denial in the House. This being the case, he felt it a duty which he owed alike to himself and to the House, to give the fullest explanation of the whole transaction; an explanation which he trusted the House would admit to be perfectly and entirely satisfactory. The question was, had he really been in communication with the parties who had petitioned the House. Next, with respect to the superficial measurement of the paper, and the limits he had adopted—he had adopted them with their privity and knowledge. It was in the month of July last that he had been first applied to to receive a deputation on the part of the London Newspaper Press, stating the then violations of the law which were constantly taking place, and requesting immediate protection from the infringement of their existing rights. He wrote in reply to that request, as he did to every other of a similar description, that he should be happy to receive the deputation at a convenient period, which he named. The paper he now held in his hand was the paper which was delivered to him as the authority of the deputation. It was signed on the part of The Times, on the part of The Globe, on the part of The Standard, on the part of The Sun, on the part of The Morning Advertiser, on the part of The Age, on the part of The Dispatch, on the part of The Courier, and on the part of The Bell's Weekly Messenger. The deputation stated to him that they represented the newspaper proprietors of the city of London, and he so received them. He gave them an answer with respect to the then state of the law, with which it was immaterial to trouble the House; and he developed to that deputation, in July last, the very scheme he had now opened for the reduction of the permanent duty, of which communication he now found a pencil note on the back of the paper. Subsequently, the chairman of that meeting wrote to see him again on the part of the newspaper proprietors of the city of London. He saw him repeatedly afterwards, not singly, but with five or six other gentlemen; he was always admitted to see him, for he had made it a rule to receive, not only the friends to the entire repeal of the tax, but those who were opposed to it. These gentlemen attended in Downing-street, and saw him, always representing that they were the committee—the same committee emanating from the meeting of newspaper proprietors of the city of London, whose paper he now held in his hand. He held also in his hand a suggestion which was left with him by those gentlemen connected with the alteration of the measurement. It was contained in the following resolution:—"Resolved, on the motion of Mr. Bell, seconded by Mr. Shaw, that a depu- tation be instructed to take with them copies of the old and new Bell's Messenger, to present to the Chancellor of the Exchequer at their next interview, and to request the right hon. Gentleman to extend his proposed limitation of size to the superficial admeasurement of those papers." This resolution was carried unanimously and signed by the chairman, and he was informed by that chairman that the original document was signed by one of the parties representing one of the papers which had petitioned that House, who now denied, through his right hon. Friend, ever having had any intercourse with him, and protested against the change he proposed. There might be altogether a mistake in the matter, these gentlemen might have falsely represented themselves to him; but his right hon. Friend, from his habits of official business, must know, that under the circumstances he could do nothing but believe that those who told him they represented the press, and that the voucher originally brought to him, as their authority, signed by the parties interested, was a voucher which accompanied them throughout the whole transaction; and therefore that he was justified in stating that he was acting with their knowledge and privity. He would not trouble the House further; he had felt it necessary to make a full explanation, and he was obliged to his right hon. Friend for having afforded him an opportunity of doing so. The parties could refer to their own chairman, and the members of the deputation who had waited on him, both of whom would repeat the whole statement he had now made. He felt it incumbent upon him to enter into it; it was important to himself, as involving a matter of personal faith and personal feeling. With reference to any statements that had been made elsewhere, he would only say that he should not have noticed them, but as his right hon. Friend had given him the opportunity of meeting an assertion in that House, he trusted the House would see that he had done no more than his duty in stating the facts as they had occurred.

was understood to say that the deputation appeared only to have included one of the petitioning parties.

replied, two.

Well, at least the Morning Post and Morning Herald were not stated to be represented.

Yes, they were stated to be represented, but no signatures on their part were added to the list which he had read.

knew nothing further on the subject, but what he gathered from communications which had been made to him in the course of the evening, by different gentlemen, who asked him to state that they had not authorized or assented to the proposition of his right hon. Friend with regard to the size of newspapers. That his right hon. Friend believed the deputation to represent those parties there could be no doubt. With respect to the other point on which the right hon. Gentleman had touched, he had found in his office the original draught of the bill, as prepared for consideration and revision, and the right hon. Gentleman had availed himself of the clauses as they stood in that draught to support the arrangement which he had adopted, but which was not borne out by the schedules actually submitted to the House. He had not intended to propose any limitation in the size of the paper; he had intended to submit a proposal, and to call on the House to approve it, which should contain no limitation whatever. His right hon. Friend would imply, that after bringing forward the general plan, it was his (Mr. Goulburn's) intention to ask the consent of the House to a clause limiting the size of newspapers, and the tendency of producing this paper, found in the office of the right hon. Gentleman, was to raise an idea that he meant to deceive the House. Now, he could assure them that he never had any such intentions; and he wished to set himself right with the House on this point. The words of the schedule were—"Newspaper containing public news, intelligence, or occurrences, or any remarks or observations thereon, or upon any matter in Church or State, with or without advertisements; (that is to say) for every sheet, half sheet, or other piece of paper, whereof the same shall consist, 4d. duty." The House would see that there was no limitation here.

said, that the clause he had found in his office contained an express provision that no newspaper should be printed on any sheet or piece of paper exceeding 41 inches in length, and 26 inches in breadth. He had no doubt that his hon. Friend had no more intention of bringing forward this proposition than he had stated to the house. He was perfectly satisfied with his right hon. Friend's explanation; he never could have produced the clause for the purpose of asserting that his right hon. Friend meant to deceive the House. He had alluded to it for the purpose of supporting his own arrangement. There would have been no necessity in the bill of the right hon. Gentleman to say a word about a supplement, if the sheet had been originally intended to be of unlimited size, and in the bill of Mr. Huskisson, which allowed sheets of any size to pass free of duty, there was no necessity for the mention of any restriction.

The words in his schedule were precisely as set down in Mr. Huskisson's Act, and that measure contained no limitation whatever.

wished to ask some questions of the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer relative to three points of his financial statement. He begged to inquire whether the duty on both descriptions of paper was to be reduced; and also if the discount of 20 per cent. now allowed on the newspaper stamps would be continued in the new scale of duty. The other point to which he wished to draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention was this—they had heard that it would be extremely desirable to reduce the taxes on raw materials, and particularly on cotton wool; now there was also a duty on the introduction of sheep's wool, and he hoped that they would be taken into consideration. He wished for the reduction of both taxes; the same principle was applicable to each; the effect of their reduction would be to relieve manufactures from the pressure of the import duty on the raw material.

said, that he meant to fix the duty on all classes of paper at 1½d. per pound, which would equalize the whole of the duty. With respect to the second question, as to the allowance of a discount of 20 per cent. on newspaper stamps, he had stated it to be his intention to propose a certain duty; he meant a certain duty in actual receipt.

thought that the newspaper proprietors in Ireland had not been fairly treated, as they were not to receive a reduction of duty proportionate to that extended to England and Scotland. He begged to call the right hon. Gentleman's attention to the propriety of making a still further reduction in the tax on glass.

wished to know if the right hon. Gentleman had included relief to the Danish claimants in his Budget.

did not know if he had quite understood the question of the hon. Baronet. He could state that he had placed on the table an estimate of a vote of 78,000l. additional for the relief of the Danish claimants. Provision would thus be made for those who had lost their property on shore; and last year compensation had been granted to those who had lost their goods on shipboard. He regretted that it was quite impossible for him, with the surplus he had already stated, to enter into the question of the glass duty. His hon. Friend behind him (Mr. Roche) should recollect that Ireland had suffered most severely, not from an equality, but an inequality of duty. An inequality could not exist, unaccompanied by a system of drawbacks; and it was under such a system when the manufacturers of England traded, not for the price of their goods, but for the drawback, that Irish manufacturers had become nearly extinct.

said, that the right hon. Gentleman seemed to have completely forgotten the agricultural interest, whose claims he (Colonel Sibthorp) had so long pressed on the attention of the House. With regard to the stamp duty on newspapers, he considered that the reduction of that tax would be in effect admitting that the power of the law was not sufficiently great.

was anxious to direct the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the propriety of making certain modifications in those restrictions on the manufacture of malt, which were found to be so onerous and oppressive.

said, that the subject was not altogether new to him, and had been already under consideration. The restrictions were in themselves undoubtedly a great evil, and only to be justified with a view to the protection of the revenue. The Ministers were as much interested in the question as any individual Member was, for when the restrictions were rigidly enforced with regard to some persons, and successfully infringed by others, the honest man would be ruined, with profit to the rogue. He should be most glad to receive any communications on this subject, and would give them his careful attention; and if the operation of the regulations could be relaxed in any way, without injury to the revenue, he would readily consent to it.

was sorry that the right hon. gentleman had not thought fit to grant any relief to the shipowners, but he still hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would be disposed to take the subject of marine insurances into his favourable consideration, not only for the sake of the shipowners, but on those sound principles of financial policy on which he had acted in reference to the newspaper duty. The consequence of the present high rate of duty was, that parties were effecting their insurances in foreign countries, and the revenue derived from this source was dwindling away. With respect to the question asked by the hon. Member for Dover as to the Danish claims, he trusted that, as the right hon. Gentleman was proceeding in the path of justice to those who had suffered by the outrageous proceedings in 1807. as he had last year relieved those who had claims arising from book debts, and as he proposed this year to give compensation to those whose goods had been confiscated on shore, he would next year consider the claims of the unfortunate individuals whose ships were seized in Denmark at that period. If no other hon. Member brought forward the question, he should certainly feel it his duty to submit it to the notice of the house. He begged to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the estimate of the claims which had been prepared, was an equitable or a legal one?

moved the further consideration of the Report on the Bishopric of Durham Bill.

moved as an amendment that it be recommitted. He strongly objected to that part of the Bill which totally abolished Local Courts in th e County of Durham; for he believed the great majority of the inhabitants of that district were decidedly against their abolition, and he felt it his duty, in the discharge of that duty which he owed his constituents, to move the recommittal of the Bill, in order to the striking out of that objectionable clause.

seconded the amendment; he thought such an important Bill ought not to be brought under the consideration of the House at such a late hour, and with so thin an attendance.

said, that he was decidedly in favour of the principle of this Bill, viz. the separation of the ecclesiastical from the civil jurisdiction of the county of Durham. But notwithstanding the amendments that had been introduced into the Bill in Committee, he fully concurred with the hon. Member who had moved the amendment as to the expediency of abolishing the Local Courts of that district. He (Mr. Pease), however favourable he might be to the general principle of centralization, thought that, in this instance, the principle was carried too far as to the juridical powers affected by this Bill; and believing as he did that the majority of the inhabitants of the county of Durham were strongly opposed to the abolition of their Local Courts, he hoped the noble Lord would allow him an opportunity in the recommittal of the Bill to state his objections to the clause which enacted that abolition. If not, he should feel bound to support the amendment of the hon. Member for the city of Durham.

said, it could not be contended at this time of day, that the Ecclesiastical dignitary of the county of Durham should be left in possession of those temporal powers and that temporal jurisdiction which belonged to him in former times. The only question, then, was, whether in making that alteration which the Bill proposed to effect and which on all hands, was allowed to be a necessary alteration, they should take that step which the Bill proposed to take. Now, the object of the measure was to place the county of Durham in the same situation as the other counties, and it was absurd to suppose they were doing more in the case of the county of Durham than had already been done with respect to the county palatine of Chester, and the principality of Wales. For his part, he could not understand what advantage was to be derived from the recommittal of the Bill, and he hoped it would be allowed to pass the present stage.

assured the House that the inhabitants of the county of Durham were greatly opposed to the abolition of the Local Courts. These Courts had been long of great advantage to the county; and although he fully agreed that the separation of the temporal and ecclesiastical jurisdiction might be beneficial, he still thought that they would be wrong if they were to deprive the inhabitants of the county of Durham of an advantage which they had so long possessed and so highly prized, especially after the dissatisfaction which it was well known the change in the principality of Wales had created. He certainly should support his hon. Friend if he persisted in. moving the recommittal of the Bill.

'thought,' that 'after what had passed the' noble Lord ought to consent that the Bill should be recommitted. If a change were called for, that change should not be effected against the wish of the in- habitants of the county.

said, that after what j had passed he would consent to the Bill being recommitted, but in doing so he must take leave to deny that the change which had taken place in the administration of justice in England and Wales had been productive of any dissatisfaction whatever.

said, that it would be his bounden duty to give this clause the most determined opposition in his power. He had presented petitions against it, and he must say that it was a gross and scandalous act of injustice to deprive men of their just emoluments, against whom there did not exist even the pretence of improper conduct. The returns on the Table of the House proved the great advantage to the county of Durham of its Local Courts, and he should therefore move that this clause be expunged from the Bill.

understood that the removal of the present was to be followed by the establishment of other Local Courts, and if that was the case one great objection to the Bill would be got rid of.

said, that if such an understanding existed it would decidedly obviate the objections which were generally entertained against this measure. There was no imputation against those Courts that they did not administer justice impartially, clearly, effectually, and economically, and, therefore, it would be unfair to take them away without giving a substitute for them. He, however, was opposed to the principle of centralisation embodied in this Bill.

also expressed a hope that the county of Durham would not be deprived of the benefit of its Local Courts.

said, that at all events, it could not be contended that the Court of Chancery of Durham was not a merely nominal jurisdiction, or that the whole of the extensive machinery of that Court was not utterly useless to the inhabitants of that county. It would be highly injurious that after the abolition of the political jurisdiction of the Bishop, such a large and cumbrous machinery should be kept up. The legal jurisdiction should be assimilated to that of other counties; and there was no reason why the same alteration should not be made in Durham as was effected, and usefully, in Chester; the jurisdiction was quite obsolete, and ought no to be retained.