said, he should oppose the Motion, for he objected to the passing of any such measure, especially at a period of the Session when so many Members were out of town that not above one hundred remained. He objected to the Bill also as a direct and injurious interference with the Bill of Eights and with the Act of Settlement; and he further objected to it because it was a matter within his own knowledge that amongst the most enlightened portion of the people of this country, an opinion was gaining ground that there was some mystery behind this Bill, and he was bound to assure the House that it was a measure looked upon with great suspicion. It was apprehended that secret negotiations were to be carried on with the Pope, for the purpose of inducing that personage to consent to those clauses which at present were opposed by every Roman Catholic Member of that House. It was also apprehended that an intention was entertained of forming an alliance between this country and the Pope, for his better security, both as a secular and an ecclesi- astical prince; and to such an alliance he should be strongly opposed, the more especially if it had any tendency to entangle us in an European war. To any result of that kind he felt strongly persuaded that the people of England were strenuously opposed. He objected also strongly to this Bill as being a further abandonment of Protestant principle. He was well aware that what he was about to say would subject him to the charge of bigotry, and bring down upon him the animadversions of many within or without those walls; but that should not deter him from doing what he conceived to be an imperative duty. He felt himself obliged to declare that he believed the blessing of the Almighty had been most mercifully vouchsafed to this nation so long as she adhered to the true Christian faith, and steadily opposed what he believed to be the delusions of Rome. For many years past we had been by degrees departing from those pure principles, and giving our countenance to Popish errors. He attributed much of our present distress and perplexity to this fatal conduct. He wished now, once for all, to protest against Parliament being thus coerced by a tyrant majority to accept a Bill which he did not hesitate to describe as forming a further and most dangerous step in dereliction of the Protestant religion. Entertaining, then, these strong opinions with reference to the present Bill, and with respect also to the time at which it was brought forward, he claimed a full right to use those forms which would enable him to delay the passing of the measure; and he conceived that if he did so use them, such a proceeding could not be considered factious.

replied, that though it might be consistent with the forms of the House to take the course which the hon. Member intimated his intention of pursuing, yet certainly such a mode of meeting the present question would not be consistent with the ancient usage of Parliament. It was by no means the practice of that House to have one, two, or three discussions upon the principle of a Bill after that Bill had been read a second time. Generally speaking, the rules and forms of that House had a tendency to promote freedom of debate, and to prevent also the extreme use of Ministerial majorities. If, however, those forms came to be abused, the House must of necessity reconsider them, and would probably substitute new rules and forms of proceeding in lieu of those which were at present in force, and this change might possibly be effected without seriously injuring any constitutional right whatever. As to what the hon. Gentleman had said with regard to the Members now out of town, he should only observe that when, upon former occasions, divisions took place respecting this Bill, the numbers were three to one in its favour; and if the House were now full, he had no doubt that the numbers on either side would continue to be in that proportion. He conceived that the Members now present did fairly represent the opinion of the House, and he must add that if every Bill were to be thus treated, no progress in public business could be made. If towards the close of every Session they were to be told that any Bill which had taken a long time must be abandoned, and that if Ministers refused to give up the measures they had introduced, that then the forms of the House were to be employed against them—if such were to be the practice of Parliament, he did not see how legislation could be proceeded with. There was nothing extraordinary in a proposition to establish diplomatic relations with the only Sovereign in Europe between whom and this country no such relations at present subsisted. If he were now to waste the time of the House in explaining the two or three mysteries which were supposed to lurk behind this measure, he doubted not that before to-morrow two or three other mysteries would spring up equally entitled to explanation.

said, that the noble Lord was mistaken if he supposed that the small amount of the opponents to the measure now in the House represented only a small number of opponents out of doors; and vindicated his friends about him from any imputations of factiousness. On the proposition of the 2nd Clause (not lawful for the Queen to receive as Ambassador, &c., from the Court of Rome any person in holy orders),

moved the omission of the word "not," contending that the enactment of such a disqualifying clause as the one proposed would render the Bill inoperative.

said, that the hon. Baronet the Member for North Essex, having yesterday charged him with being in the habit of reading a disgusting book, he desired to explain, in order to prevent all misconception out of doors, that the book alluded to, called the Garden of the Soul, was a book of religious exercise, intended to and individuals in the private examination of the conscience; and, he might observe, in reference to most books, even the Holy Scriptures, that if isolated passages were taken without regard to their context or purpose, specious but unwarrantable objections might be urged against them. With respect to the clause under consideration, he thought they must have diplomatic relations with the Court of Rome fully and entirely, or not at all.

thought the hon. and learned Member for Youghal was almost bound to vote against his own Amendment. The hon. and learned Member had opposed the Bill, apprehending great danger from it; and now he said, that if the present clause were retained in its existing shape, it would entirely defeat the operation of the Bill. The hon. and learned Member would, therefore, accomplish all he had sought to effect in opposing the Bill, if he allowed the clause to stand unaltered. He was opposed to the removal of the disqualification inserted in the Bill in another place, because he thought its retention only a proper deference to the feelings of a large class of the population. It must be recollected, too, that the Government of Rome was now constitutional and secularised. He believed an ecclesiastic had now been appointed to the office of Foreign Affairs, who was, however, the only ecclesiastic in the Administration. The Government of Rome was now lay, responsible, and constitutional; and the probability was, that the lay advisers of the Pope would be desirous that some opportunity should be afforded of employing in diplomatic relations the nobles of the Roman States. This clause would only make that the law of this country which was now the practice of other non-Catholic Governments—Russia and Prussia for instance. Both those countries had diplomatic relations with the Court of Rome; but they refused to receive an ecclesiastic as the representative of Rome; and the consequence was, that while there had been Prussian and Russian Ministers at Rome, there had not been a Roman representative either at Berlin or St. Petersburgh. Supposing, then, that in the case of this country a similar result should follow the maintenance of this clause, our diplomatic relations with the Roman States would not be put upon a singular footing. He considered, therefore, that it would be inexpedient to disturb the clause.

said, with reference to the statement he had made on a former occasion, and which had been alluded to by the noble Lord (Lord Arundel), he begged to say that, although he made that statement under some warmth of feeling, he would not withdraw an iota of it. The noble Lord had acknowledged that he was in the habit of reading a Roman Catholic book, which, from a regard to decency, he (Sir J. Tyrell) had said he would not further refer to unless he were challenged to do so. If it was the wish of the House, he was quite ready to read some passages from the work in question. ["No, no!"]

observed, that the hon. Baronet had, on a former occasion, referred to a book which he said contained very objectionable passages, and which he stated, if he was challenged to do so, he was ready to read to the House. The noble Lord (Lord Arundel) had not challenged the hon. Baronet to read those passages; and he thought, therefore, that the hon. Baronet was quite right in not having read them. This was not at all a question of politics; it was not a question with regard to diplomatic intercourse. It was in fact a question relating to the religious faith of churches to which various Members of that House belonged. Every one knew that certain objections were made by all Protestants to the Roman Catholic religion, and certain answers were given by Roman Catholics to those objections; but, whether those objections were good and sufficient objections, and whether the answers were good and sufficient answers, were questions of religious feeling, which he thought it most unfitting that that House should be called upon to decide. He (Lord J. Russell) would especially regret that any question of religious faith should be introduced in a manner which might be offensive to the feelings of any hon. Member of that House; and he therefore hoped, that not only the hon. Baronet, but every other hon. Member, would refrain from discussions which were irrelevant, and which might be offensive to many Gentlemen.

said, they had had some little proof of the incompetency of those who attacked the Roman Catholic religion to form a very accurate judgment on the subject; for the most common and ordinary book of Roman Catholic practice was so new to these persons that it absolutely scared them from their propriety. As these objectors appeared to know nothing of the difference between opiniones doctrinœ et disciplinœ, he did not wonder that they had shown themselves incapable of doing anything beyond expressing a rancorous and blind hostility on a subject they did not understand. When these hon. Gentlemen claimed credit to themselves for being the representatives of all the Protestant feeling of the country, they appeared to have left out of the question most unceremoniously two Gentlemen of their own party whose reputation stood as high as that of any Member of that House—the hon. Member for Midhurst (Mr. Walpole), and the right hon. Member for Stamford (Mr. Herries), who had expressed their approbation of this Bill, and their intention to support it. He (Mr. Drummond) regarded this clause as an insult to the Roman Catholics and the Court of Rome; and, as he believed it would tend to embarrass the working of the measure, he would oppose it. The hon. Gentlemen near him must be in utter ignorance of Romish tricks, if they thought an Act of Parliament could prevent the Pope from being represented in this country by an ecclesiastic. Surely these simple Gentlemen—these canny Scots—did not think they were a match for Jesuits? The fact was, that this clause had been introduced into the Bill as a sop to bigotry.

believed that the clause contained much that was frivolous, unreasonable, and impolitic; but on reading the words in print on the back of the Bill, he would recommend those interested in its passing, to consider the propriety of accepting it as it stood. After a short discussion, chiefly on the Catholic religion, the Amendment was negatived.

moved that after the words "That nothing herein contained," the following words he inserted," shall authorise any intercourse or communion with the See or Church of Rome upon ecclesiastical and spiritual matters now forbidden by law."

presented a petition complaining of the treatment to which the Chartist prisoners lately convicted as misdemeanants at the Old Bailey were subjected at the house of correction, and said he had presented upon a former occasion a petition of the same kind. The petitioners stated their belief that the Secretary for the Home Department had issued special orders for the coercive treatment of the prisoners in the house of correction, and they thought it quite useless to petition the Home Office on the subject, and consequently now appealed to that House. He (Mr. Wakley) believed that the statement was altogether unfounded; and in his opinion nothing could be more unreasonable or unjust than to entertain such a belief with regard to the conduct of the right hon. Gentleman. Whatever his politics might be, yet with reference to these offenders, he believed that the right hon. Gentleman was utterly incapable of doing that which he was said to have done; and seeing the hon. Member for Maidstone in his place, who was one of the visiting magistrates of the prison, he begged leave to inquire whether there was any truth in the allegations of the petition that special instructions had been issued from the Home Office for the treatment of these prisoners with undue or unreasonable severity; whether instructions had been issued from the Home Office for treating them as felons; whether, in fact, the statements in the petition were generally correct; and also to state what was the actual condition of the prisoners, and whether at the present moment they were making any complaints to the visiting justices as to the treatment they received?

said, before he answered the question of the hon. Gentleman, he might be allowed to advert to that part of the petition which had reference to himself. He should, however, state, that although the petition was written in the plural number, it was signed by one individual only, as the chairman of a meeting, without any reference to any meeting in that petition. [MR. WAKLEY said it was agreed to at a public meeting.] With respect, however, to himself, as having sent special instructions for the treatment of these prisoners, he begged to give his most unqualified contradiction to that statement. He had no power to give any such special instructions, and the magistrates would not be performing their duty if they observed them. The prisoners were classed by the magistrates, subject to the approval of the Secretary of State, under Act of Parliament, and he had no authority to alter those regulations. As to another statement in the petition, that it was useless to address the Home Office, he could state that that was not the fact; for two of the prisoners had addressed him, and he had referred it to the justices, with an intimation that every statement that was made by the prisoners should have every reasonable consideration.

could fully corroborate the statement of the right hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, that he had not interfered in any way with the regulations of the house of correction. The memorials sent to the Home Office by two of the Chartist prisoners were referred to the visiting magistrates by the right hon. Baronet, who had stated to him that he hoped no unnecessary restrictions would he imposed. The sentences on the prisoners implied that they were to be subjected to certain rules framed for all houses of correction when Lord Normanby was in office, and had not since been departed from. The question put by the hon. Member for Finsbury showed that considerable misrepresentation had gone abroad with respect to the five Chartist prisoners now undergoing sentence of imprisonment. As a visiting magistrate, he had seen these persons each week, and they all expressed themselves grateful to the magistrates, and more particularly to the governor, Lieutenant Tracy, for the lenient manner in which the regulations had been carried out. It was said that the prisoners' hair had been cut close immediately on their entering the prison. This was not the case. Ernest Jones's hair was cut about a week after his entrance at his own request, and by the advice of the surgeon, owing to the weakness of his eyes. The others were cropped about the same time, except Vernon's, whose hair was not cut for a fortnight, and then not after the Dover crop, but trimmed in the same manner as any Gentleman in the House would have had his done. The prisoners all stated they had no complaint to make with respect to their food. The dietary of the house was a loaf of white bread weighing nearly a pound and a half, with a pint of cocoa, for breakfast, and a similar loaf and a pint of gruel at supper. Four days in the week they had for dinner six ounces of meat and eight ounces of potatoes, making on these days thirty-one ounces of solid food; on the other three days, a pint and a half of good soup in lieu of meat. Fussell and Sharpe both said, that if every working man lived nearly as well, there would not be discontent in the country. They were permitted to have books sent them (subject to the approval of the chaplain), and when he called that morning Vernon was reading a scientific hook, and Jones working a mathematical problem. In fact, every indulgence had been given. Vernon stated to the governor that he was accustomed to take baths, and the governor immediately ordered he should have them two or three times a week. The sentence on these pri- soners made it requisite that they should be put in prison dress, and everything furnished to them was new. The dress they were was that of misdemeanants, blue, different from that of felons, which was of gray cloth with a number on the shoulder. He hoped he had given such explanation respecting their treatment as would satisfy the House; and if the hon. Member for Finsbury wished for more information he should be happy to give it.

wished to put to the Government some questions with respect to the treatment of the convict Mitchel. He was induced to do so because it had been communicated to him that Mitchel was not treated as a convict, but, to use the expression of his informant, who was a resident in Bermuda, rather as a State prisoner. He was also informed through other sources that the convict was allowed the use of two rooms, with a servant to wait upon him—that he was not subjected to any kind of labour—that he were no distinctive dress—and that his position was better than that of many officers in Her Majesty's service in that island. Before however, he put the question he would say, he had no wish to press harshly upon that unhappy individual—far from it; but his object was to ascertain, what was so important to the public, whether the law of this country was fairly, justly, and impartially administered. The first question he would put was to the gallant Admiral opposite with reference to the treatment of Mitchel on board the Scourge. It was stated that he messed with the officers on going to Bermuda; but he (Mr. Robinson) was unwilling to believe it. He could not think it possible; but it was publicly stated, and believed at Bermuda, and it was important it should he contradicted for the honour of the naval service and the character of the gallant Admiral. The question he wished to put to the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary was, whether any orders had been given with respect to the treatment of Mitchel at Bermuda, and whether any communication had been made to the Secretary of State by the authorities at Bermuda as to the manner in which that individual had been treated?

believed he could answer both the questions of the hon. Gentleman as far as any information was in the power of the Government. With respect to the first, he could say that no such information had reached the Government; and he was certain, from information he did possess, and from the nature of the instructions addressed to the captain of the ship in which Mitchel was removed, that it was not correct. The hon. Gentleman would remark that Mitchel was not sent to Bermuda in an ordinary convict ship, but in a man-of-war. Special instructions were given to the captain from the Admiralty, directing him to take every precaution for the security of the prisoner, at the same time, while the vessel was at sea, as the prisoner was stated by the surgeon of the gaol to be in delicate health, to select a cabin for his confinement, placing a sentry at the door where his meals were to he taken. He must, therefore, utterly disbelieve the statement to which the hon. Gentleman referred. A letter was also written by the Secretary of State to the Governor of Bermuda, calling his attention to the case of the prisoner, and to the report of the surgeon at Spike Island as to the health of the prisoner, and the kind of labour for which he was unfit. The Government had received no information corroborative of the hon. Gentleman's statement as to the treatment of Mitchel at Bermuda. The only information they did possess was contained in a despatch dated the 4th of July, in which the Governor said, that the medical superintendent stated it as his opinion that Mitchel was suffering from a chronic affection of the lungs, and that he had caused him to he received on board the Tenedos hospital ship. Since that information was received he had been removed from the Tenedos to another convict hulk; but he (Sir G. Grey) presumed that the state of the convict's health had been such as to prevent his being put to any kind of hard labour, as convicts usually were.

rose to move—

"That no future appropriation of moneys taken from general taxation be made in and of the Poor Rate of Irish Unions except on condition—1. That it be expended in the productive employment of the able-bodied poor. 2. That repayment be secured by a lien on the property improved by the works, as well as on the rateable property of the Union."

He complained that the Poor Law Commissioners employed the poor in stone-breaking, which was an unproductive occu- pation, and refused the request which had been made to them by several boards of guardians, that the ablebodied paupers might be employed in productive labour on the land. There was no difficulty in finding employment for productive labour in Ireland; and experience had shown, according to the statement of Dr. Harrison, that the ablebodied poor might be most successfully engaged in reclaiming waste land. What could be more demoralising than feeding men in a state of perfect idleness? If any public money was to he contributed out of the hard earnings of the people of this country in and of the poor-rates of some of the Irish unions, he contended that it ought to be spent in such a manner as would be productive of some profit, so as to afford some chance of the money being repaid. It would be unjust to the English public if some condition of this kind did not attach to the loan of English money.

thought the hon. Gentleman had very unfairly thrown blame on the Poor Law Commissioners for not doing that which the law did not empower them to do. He complained that the ablebodied paupers were not provided for by the Poor Law Commissioners, and kept in employment. Now, it was enough to say that the law absolutely prohibited the Commissioners from giving relief in the way the hon. Gentleman proposed. The law might be right or wrong; but, unquestionably, it prohibited the ablebodied being relieved except in the workhouse. He entirely differed from the hon. Gentleman in the view he took of the question. He did not think that the employment of pauper labourers on what the hon. Gentleman called "reproductive works" would he attended with success; he did not think they would be reproductive works at all. The hon. Gentleman did not say what those reproductive works ought to be. He merely quoted from Alison's pamphlet on that part of the question. Now, the essence of Dr. Ahson's plan was, that forcible possession should he taken of waste lands; but it was impossible the Poor Law Commissioners could do this, as no such compulsory powers were given them. He believed that if such a plan as that proposed by the hon. Gentleman was carried out, they would turn the whole country into one mass of pauperism; and he therefore, hoped that the propositions submitted by the hon. Member would not receive the sanction of the House.

said, the report of the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland contained a complete refutation of the crotchets put forward by the hon. Member for Stroud, and showed that it was impossible to carry out the reclamation of waste lands in the manner he proposed. The report, however, gave, on the other hand, much encouragement to the House to grant loans to Irish proprietors for the improvement of their estates. The Commissioners showed that great advantages had followed the drainage and other works, and that they anticipated no difficulty in a gradual repayment of the expenditure in half-yearly instalments.

thought the portions of the report to which the noble Lord had referred were in favour of the propositions of the hon. Member for Stroud. He concurred in the principles laid down by the hon. Gentleman, and he thought the House was obliged to him for calling their attention to the way in which future payments for works in Ireland ought to be made. He was clearly in favour of a system by which ablebodied paupers should be relieved by means of labour, provided that labour was of a productive character; and he did not see, therefore, why the proposal of the hon. Gentleman should not be agreed to by the House.

I think I can agree generally with the principles laid down on this subject by the hon. Member for Montrose; but I do not go along with him in thinking that the view which he has so far commended is at one with the object which my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud has proposed. It may be very useful to advance money from the State on particular occasions, with the view of getting work executed for the improvement of estates; and that is what the noble Lord (Lord G. Bentinck) referred to as having been done under the Land Improvement Act. In a case of that kind a loan is advanced to the proprietor, and the Board of Works sees that the particular work is executed; but the work is executed by the ordinary means of giving due wages to those who are employed, viz., the ablebodied labourers, who, in return for those wages, perform the work given them to do. In that way property may be much improved; a fair return may be obtained for the money expended; employment is given; and the whole result of such money being advanced is very beneficial to all parties. There is another mode in which the State may be called on to assist, and that is the mode in which relief is afforded in this country in a time of great distress and destitution. In those periods when there are a great many desstitute poor, those destitute poor are allowed a certain amount of relief; and in order to obtain proof that those persons are really destitute, and that they would not come for relief if they could find employment elsewhere, some work which is of an irksome kind, is given them to do—the work being of value, as a proof that they are persons to whom relief should be afforded. That is the way in which we spend several millions a-year in this country for the relief of destitution. Now, both these things may be exceedingly right to be undertaken, and both have their separate uses. But if you attempt to combine these two things—if you say you will employ all the paupers in a district, and, at the same time, undertake useful works, by means of which regular wages will be earned, you are just doing the very thing to which the hon. Member for Montrose objects; because he says, and says truly, that if the Government undertakes works and employs labour, it interferes with the labour market, and therefore the whole result is very unsatisfactory. I agree with him in that respect. If you say these persons are destitute, and therefore you must employ them, you will find that their labour is not worth that which it pretends to be worth, and that you are paying them money in the way of wages, while you are not getting work equal to the amount of those wages. On the other hand, you find a number of persons coming to these public works who are not really destitute, and to whom you would not otherwise think of affording relief. There are, however, as I have said, two courses, both of which may be necessary. The one is, to advance money to proprietors to be laid out in labour for the improvement of their estates; and the other is, that in cases of extreme destitution you afford relief for the purpose of preventing the misery that may be induced. But when you attempt to combine them, as the hon. Member for Stroud attempts to do, you will inevitably fall into an error that cannot fail to be prejudicial. I believe the hon. Member for Montrose, and I perfectly agree in these propositions; but then these are not the objects sought for by the hon. Member for Stroud. I have only to say that I do not think it would be safe to adopt the proposal of the hon. Member, as it would, I am afraid, lead to some highly injurious modes of proceeding with reference to Ireland.

From the speeches that have been delivered in this debate, and from what we know of Ireland; it is clear that country is so entirely disorganised, that it is extremely difficult to suggest any means by which relief can be extensively given without causing two evils: first, the waste of a great portion of the money which is granted; and next, the demoralisation of a large number of those to whom the relief is given. It is on account of these difficulties that I am disposed to make great allowances for the measures which the Government have undertaken, as well as for any propositions which may be made by the hon. Member for Stroud, even when they appear somewhat inconsistent with correct economical principles. As this is probably the last opportunity during this Session when the question of the condition of Ireland can be discussed, I am anxious to avail myself of it to offer a few observations to the House, and to explain briefly what I conceive to be the course which ought to be taken with regard to that country, to enable its population to place themselves in a position of comfort and independence. The past of Ireland is known to us all; it is a tale of idleness, and poverty, and periodical insurrection; and the present of Ireland is like the past, except that at this moment all its ordinary evils are exhibited in an aggravated form. But there are one or two points with regard to this subject to which I wish especially to ask the attention of the House. Have you ever fully considered the effect which this state of things in Ireland has upon the condition of certain districts in England? We have had some threatenings of disturbances in England, and of disaffection—I hope it is not wide-spread—here and there in various parts of the country. Take the county of Lancaster as an example, and you will see something of the consequences of a large influx of the Irish population into that district. In Liverpool and Manchester, and in all the belt of towns which surround Manchester, there is a large Irish population—in fact, there is an Irish quarter in each of these towns. It is true a great number of these persons are steady, respectable, and industrious, but it is notorious that a large portion of them are the directly opposite of all this. They bring to this country all the vices which have prevailed so much in Ireland; their influence on the people of Lancashire is often of the most unfavourable character, and the effect of their example on the native population must necessarily be injurious. We find that crimes attended with violence too much prevail in Lancashire and Yorkshire. These crimes to a large extent are committed by persons who are not natives of those counties, but who come from Ireland, because it is impossible for them to find subsistence in that country. There is another point which seems to me important. Driven forth by poverty, Irishmen emigrate in great numbers, and in whatsoever quarter of the world an Irishman sets his foot, there stands a bitter—an implacable enemy of England. That is one of the results of the wide-spread disaffection that exists in Ireland. There are hundreds of thousands of the population of the United States of America who are Irish by birth, or by immediate descent; and be it remembered, Irishmen settled in the United States have a large influence in public affairs. They sometimes sway the election of Members of the Legislature, and may even affect the election of the President of the Republic. There may come a time when questions of a critical nature will be agitated between the Governments of Great Britain and the United States; and it is certain that at such a time the Irish in that country will throw their whole weight into the scale against this country, and against peace with this country. These are points which it is necessary to consider, and which arise out of the lamentable condition in which Ireland is placed. When we reflect for a moment upon the destitution which millions of our countrymen suffer in that unfortunate island, the conclusion is inevitable either that the Government or the people of Ireland are in fault. I think both are in fault. I think the Government has been negligent of Ireland. I do not mean the present Government in particular; for they are fully as anxious for the welfare of Ireland as any former Administration has been—but I think the Government generally has been negligent of Ireland. It is a common thing to hear it said, and especially by Gentlemen sitting on the Treasury bench, that the remedy for Irish evils is difficult, and that the difficulty seems insurmountable; but the House may rest assured that no difficulty can be so great as that which must be met if no remedy is applied. To do anything that can be effectual, must be infinitely less dangerous than to do nothing. Now I believe the real difficulties which beset this question, do not arise from anything in Ireland, so much as from the constitution of the Government. This House, and the other House of Parliament, are almost exclusively aristocratic in their character. The Administration is therefore necessarily the same, and on the Treasury benches aristocracy reigns supreme. Not fewer than seven Members of the Cabinet are Members of the House of Lords; and every other Member of it is either a Lord by title, or on the very threshold of the peerage by birth or marriage. I am not blaming them for this; it may even be that from neither House of Parliament can fourteen better men be chosen to fill their places. But I maintain that in the present position of Ireland, and looking at human nature as it is, it is not possible that fourteen Gentlemen, circumstanced as these are, can meet round the Council table, and with unbiassed minds fairly discuss the question of Ireland, as it now presents itself to this House, to the country, and to the world. The condition of Ireland requires two kinds of remedies—one political, the other social; and it is hard to tell where the one ends and the other begins. I will speak first of the political remedies. At present there prevails throughout three-fourths of the Irish people a total unbelief in the honesty and integrity of the Government of this country. There may or may not be good grounds for all this ill-feeling; but that it exists no man acquainted with Ireland will deny. The first step to be taken is to remove this feeling; and, to do this, some great measure or measures should be offered to the people of Ireland, which will act as a complete demonstration to them that bygones are to be bygones with regard to the administration of Irish affairs, and that henceforth new, and generous, and equal principles of government are to be adopted. I have on a former occasion stated my opinions on one or two subjects, and I will venture again briefly to explain them to the House. Ireland has long been a country of jars and turmoil, and its jars have arisen chiefly from religious dissensions. In respect of matters of religion she has been governed in a manner totally unknown in England and Scotland. If Ireland has been rightly governed—if it has been wise and just to maintain the Protestant Church established there, you ought, in order to carry out your system, to establish Prelacy in Scotland, and Catholicism in England; and if you were to attempt to do either the one or the other, it would not he a sham but a real insurrection you would provoke. There must be equality between the great religious sects in Ireland—between Catholic and Protestant. It is impossible that this equality can he much longer denied. It is suspected that it is the intention of the Government to bring forward at no distant day, if they can catch the people of England napping, a proposition for paying the Roman Catholic priests of Ireland. On more than one ground I should object to any such scheme. In the first place, I believe the Government cannot, from any funds they possess, or from any they can obtain, place the Catholic priests on an equality with the ministers of the Protestant church; and if they cannot do that in every respect, the thing is not worth attempting. They will, I think, find it infinitely more easy, and it will certainly be much more in accordance with political justice, and with the true interests of religion, to withdraw from Ireland the Church Establishment which now exists there, and to bring about that perfect equality which may be secured by taking away so much of the funds as are proved to be totally unnecessary for the wants of the population. I do not mean that you should withdraw from the Protestant Church every sixpence now in its possession; what I mean is, that you should separate it from the State, and appropriate all the funds of which it might justly be deprived to some grand national object, such as the support and extension of the system of education now established in Ireland; an appropriation of money which would, I am sure, produce in the minds of the people of Ireland an entire change of feeling with regard to the legislation of Parliament in relation to their country. With regard to the Parliamentary representation of Ireland, having recently spent seventy-three days in an examination of the subject, whilst serving as a Member of the Dublin Election Committee, I assert most distinctly that the representation which exists at this moment is a fraud; and I believe it would be far better if there were no representation at all, because the people would not then he deluded by the idea that they had a representative government to protect their interests. The number of taxes the people have to pay, in order to secure either the municipal or Parliamentary franchise, is so great that it is utterly impossi- ble for the constituencies to be maintained, and for public opinion—the honest, real opinion of the intelligent classes in Ireland—to obtain any common or decent degree of representation in the imperial Legislature. I feel quite confident that in the next Session of Parliament, the questions of religious equality in Ireland, and of Irish representation, must receive a mush more serious attention than they have obtained in any past Session. I come now to those social questions which must also receive the attention of Parliament, for if they do not, the political remedies will, after all, be of very little permanent use. I advocate these political changes on the ground, not that they will feed the hungry or employ the idle, but that they will be as oil thrown upon the waters, and will induce the people no longer to feel themselves treated as a conquered race. It is agreed on all sides that the social remedies which are immediately possible to us, are those having reference to the mode in which the land of Ireland is owned, or held and cultivated—perhaps "not cultivated" would be a more correct expression. The noble Lord at the head of the Government has alluded to parts of Ireland in which it is impossible that the land as at present held, or the rates which can be collected, can find relief or sustentation for the people. It is a notorious fact, that there are vast tracts of land in Ireland, which, if left in the hands of nominal and bankrupt owners, will never to the end of time support the population which ought to live upon them. And it is on this ground that I must question the policy of measures for expending public money with a view to the cultivation and reclamation of these lands. The true solution of this matter is to get the lands out of the hands of men who are the nominal, and not the real, possessors. But Parliament maintains laws which act most injuriously in this particular. The law and practice of entails tend to keep the soil in large properties, and in the hands of those who cannot perform their duty to it. It will be said that entails exist in Scotland and in England. Yes; but this Session a law has passed, or is passing, to modify the system as it has heretofore existed in Scotland; and in England many of its evils have been partially overcome by the extraordinary, and, to some degree, the accidental extension of manufacturing industry among the people. In Ireland there are no such mitigations; a code of laws exist, under which it is impossible for the land and the people to be brought, as it were, together, and for industry to live in independence and comfort, instead of crawling to this House, as it does almost annually, to ask alms of the hardworking people of England. The law and practice of primogeniture is another evil of the same character. It is a law unnatural and unjust at all times; but in the present condition of Ireland it cannot much longer be endured. Were I called upon—and it is a bold figure of speech to mention such a thing—but were I called upon to treat this Irish question, I would establish, for a limited period at least, a special court in Ireland to adjudicate on all questions connected with the titles and transfers of landed property. This court should finally decide questions of title; it should prepare and enforce a simple and short form of conveyance, as short almost as that by which railway stock is transferred; and, without regard to the public revenue, I would abolish every farthing of expense which is now incurred in the duties on stamps, for the purpose of facilitating the distribution of land in Ireland, and of allowing the capital and industry of the people to work out its salvation. All this is possible; and, more than this, it is all necessary. Well, now, what is the real obstacle in our path? You have toiled at this Irish difficulty Session after Session, and some of you have grown from boyhood to grey headed old men, since it first met you in your legislative career, and yet there is not in ancient or modern history a picture so humiliating as that which Ireland presents to the world at this moment; and there is not an English gentleman who, if he crossed the Channel in the present autumn, and travelled in any foreign country, would not wish to escape from any conversation among foreigners, in which the question of the condition of Ireland was mooted for a single moment. Let the House, if it can, regard Ireland as an English county. Let us think of the eight millions of people, and of the millions of them doomed to this intolerable suffering. Let us think of the half-million, who, within two years past, have perished miserably in the workhouses and on the highways, and in their hovels—more, far more than ever fell by the sword in any war this country ever waged; let us think of the crop of nameless horrors which is even now growing up in Ireland, and whose disastrous fruit may be gathered in years and generations to come. Let us examine what are the laws and the principles under which alone God and nature have permitted that nations should become industrious and provident. I hope the House will pardon me, if I have said a word that can offend any one. But I feel conscious of a personal humiliation when I consider the state of Ireland. I do not wish to puff nostrums of my own, though it may be thought I am opposed to much that exists in the present order of things; but whether it tended to advance democracy, or to uphold aristocracy, or any other system, I would wish to fling to the winds any prejudice I have entertained, and any principle that may he questioned, if I can thereby do one single thing to hasten by a single day the time when Ireland shall be made at least equal to England in that comfort and that independence which an industrious people may have, if the Government under which they live is equal and just.

said, that he concurred in what had fallen from the hon. Member for Stroud, as regards the principle, that whatever money was advanced by this country to Ireland, ought to be expended in productive labour, and not in useless works. The rental of Ireland was estimated at thirteen millions, and the incumbrances amounted to six millions; but with regard to some particular estates the interest on the mortgages amounted to nine-tenths of the rental. Although the poor-rate, taking the whole country, might not average more than a shilling in the pound on the annual rental, yet in particular localities the rate amounted to five, and in some cases to ton shillings in the pound. Now, as landlords were liable to pay half the rates of their tenants whose holdings were under five pounds a year, it sometimes happened that the whole rent derived from an estate heavily incumbered, was absorbed for poor-rates. He (Mr. Brotherton, had found from experience and observation, that it was easier to point out evils, and to find fault, than to prescribe remedies and carry them out. One thing, however, he considered desirable in reference to Ireland. He would have a property-tax levied in that country, to form a general fund, which might be appropriated to the relief of distressed districts where the population was great, and the poor-rates much above the general average of the country. The burden of supporting the poor would thus fall upon the property of the country more equally than at present, and give essential relief to those districts where it was most needed.

then rose and said: I am afraid, after the debate on the state of Ireland, the subject I am about to introduce, although of more general importance, will not excite so much interest, especially among Members connected with that country. Nevertheless, it is requisite, for many reasons, that the statement I am about to make should be made to-night; because, according to the forms of the House, we cannot go into Committee of Ways and Means on Saturday; and it would materially impede the progress of public business if I were not allowed to make my financial statement before the close of the week. This was the only reason why my noble Friend suggested the propriety of going into Committee of Ways and Means without further delay; and not in the slightest degree because we were insensible to the importance of the subject, or were unprepared to give our best attention to the condition of Ireland. Having stated this much, which I hope will satisfy the Gentlemen from Ireland, that really good reasons existed for the course my noble Friend has taken in cutting short the debate, I will at once turn to the important subject of the Committee of Ways and Means; and, first of all, I will state what I consider the financial condition of the country, and the means which the Government have adopted since the commencement of the Session in regard to the finances. In doing so, I am aware I shall not have much that is new to state to the Committee; for, in the first place, as the whole of the estimates have been voted, the amount of expenditure is perfectly well known to the House. At the beginning of the Session, and at various other periods, statements were made which put the House in possession of the then precise state of affairs. But, although I have not much to state that may be novel, it is desirable that I should place before the Committee, in one view, the result of the operations of the Session—what the expenditure will amount to—what we expect the income to be—and how I propose to make the income equal to the expenditure. This I am anxious to do as clearly, as accurately, and as concisely as possible. Gentlemen will probably remember, that when my noble Friend made his statement early in the Session, the prospects which he held out to the country were as follows. He estimated the probable receipts at 51,250,000l.; he stated the debt and other charges on the Consolidated Fund at 31,280,600l.; he took the current expenditure to be voted in supply at 21,820,441l., making an expenditure belonging to the year of 53,101,041l. He stated the amount of expenditure which had been incurred on account of the Caffre war and the excess of naval estimates in the preceding year at 1,345,411l., making altogether 54,446,452l.; and he intimated the intention of the Government to make a further development of the militia force of the country, which would occasion an expense of 150,000l., making the total expenditure of the year as then proposed 54,596,452l. In order to meet this expenditure, the proposal of the Government was to raise the income-tax from 3 to 5 per cent for a period of two years. This was estimated to produce 3,500,000l. My noble Friend then proposed to remit the duty on copper, by which a loss of revenue was expected to the extent of 40,000l. The estimated income then was 54,710,000l, the expenditure 54,596,452l., leaving a balance of 113,548l. The proposal we then made was, as I have said, a temporary increase of taxation for a period of two years; and the reason for proposing that temporary increase was, that a great portion of the expenditure incurred was for temporary purposes. There was the expenditure for the Caffre war, which was closed, and the naval excess had occurred in the preceding year, for which it was necessary to replace in the Exchequer the moneys which had been withdrawn; and with regard to a considerable portion of the increased expense, it was occasioned mainly by heavy works in the dockyards, which had been begun, not by us, but by a preceding Government; but which certainly it was desirable to carry on, and which I believe it would be, after all, most desirable with a view to real economy to complete at an early day. Feeling this, the Government thought it necessary in order to meet this expenditure, to make a heavy demand on the resources of the country, and for the period of two years we proposed an increase of the income-tax. That proposal was certainly not received with any favour by the House. I am perfectly prepared to admit that the circumstances under which the country was labouring, the distress through which they had gone during the six or eight months preceding, formed a very good reason why they should have been unwilling at that time to submit to additional taxation. The circumstances, too, which occurred on the Continent shortly after that proposal was made, throwing as they did into the greatest uncertainty the whole prospects of the country, not only politically but commercially and financially, tended to make us more willing at that time to abandon our proposal for additional taxation, leaving to a future time to announce what other resource we should adopt. The abandonment of that proposal for additional taxation made it necessary for us to review the whole finances and taxation of the country, in order that we might take such an altered course as, in the altered circumstances, might appear advisable. I now propose to state to the Committee what that course was, and the result at which we have arrived. With the permission of the Committee, I will, for the present, put aside all considerations of past expenditure, and deal only with the income of the year as compared with the expenditure; for it will be observed that, both with regard to the expenditure for the Caffre war and the naval excess, they had been defrayed by moneys in the Exchequer. They were included in the expenditure as stated in the balance-sheet of the 5th of April, which nevertheless showed balances to the extent of 6,768,336l. The moneys so advanced, however, it was necessary to replace to the Exchequer. The first object of the Government was to revise the expenditure. It must be observed, that in the course of the two or three preceding years there had been no inconsiderable increase of expenditure—not an increase of expenditure proposed by ourselves, but principally before we came into office. I find that, in the year 1846, an increase of the estimates and of charge as compared with the preceding year was no less than 1,610,000l., exclusive of those charges which, to the extent of 345,500l, were transferred from the county rates and local taxation to the general revenue, making in all an increase of 1,955,500l. in the expenditure of 1846—in round numbers, nearly 2,000,000l. The hon. Gentleman the Member for the West Riding of Yorkshire said very truly not very long ago that it was not this Government nor any other Government that was responsible for this increased expenditure. The House of Commons had concurred in its propriety, and in many instances had pressed the increased expenditure on the Government. The increased estimate was passed with little opposition—the country concurred in it; and the hon. Gentleman said, very wisely, if blame there was, all participated in it. Our duty, therefore, is not to recriminate one on another, but in the present state of the country to unite our common efforts for the purpose of reducing expenditure, so far as it can he done without impairing the efficiency of our establishments. I think, moreover, that in respect to the object for which the greatest increase of expenditure has taken place, namely, in the maintenance of our national defences, the House of Commons has only carried out what appeared to be the feeling of the country. Last year, and the year before, there was a very general feeling of alarm throughout the country. Not only Gentlemen in the House, but the public generally, had a strong feeling of that kind; and in the proposals which were made in this House for increasing our means of national defence, both the Government of the day and the House of Commons itself fairly represented the opinions of the country. That opinion, no doubt, has since changed. I myself was never one of the alarmists. I never took a very desponding view on that subject. But such was the general opinion; but it is now desirable that these measures should be carried only more slowly into execution than was then thought advisable by the House and the country. With a view to reduction the first step taken by the Government was to appoint two Committees to look into the expenses of the country—one having the miscellaneous estimates, the other the naval and military estimates, submitted to them. We have now before us two able reports on these subjects, from which great information will be derived. As I stated before, those Committees were not appointed for the purpose of avoiding responsibility on the part of the Government. But I do think the revision of our expenditure from time to time is a matter of the greatest importance, if it were only to afford to hon. Members that knowledge which will enable them to discuss the estimates with discrimination. Having appointed these Committees, the Government immediately gave their earnest attention, to the subject, and it was my duty to call on all the departments and insist that they should act with the utmost economy. With the greatest readiness this desire was complied with. In one point, namely, the amount of force, no reduction was made. That was absolutely necessary, as we thought, for the safety of the country; and the House of Commons have confirmed that opinion by the largest majorities in regard to both descriptions of force. I do not think, looking at the circumstances which have since taken place, that we could safely have proposed a reduction on that head. Both with regard to the sister country and the manufacturing districts there have been constant demands for military protection, and we should have been less able to afford that protection to those parties who had a right to demand it, if we had not had a force fully as large as the House of Commons voted on the proposition of the Government. But with respect to other portions of the expenditure, it was possible to make considerable reductions. I do not wish to deceive the House, however, by saying that I think it good economy to make all the reductions we propose if we could avoid it. On the contrary, I am of opinion that it would be better economy, in the end, to proceed at a more rapid rate with the works we have on hand than to defer the expenditure, and spread it over a longer period. But, on the other hand, it is sometimes advisable to defer the expenditure, and spread it over a longer period, in order to bring the yearly outlay within the means of the country; and therefore we have determined to do so in the present instance. In the course we have pursued, therefore, I wish to state fairly and frankly what my opinion is. I think we were justified in making the proposals we did by the soundest principles of finance; but the House not having concurred in those proposals, we have endeavoured to meet the views of the House by reducing to the utmost extent we could those portions of the expenditure which were at all susceptible of it. The reductions which we have effected are as follows:—The vote on the Navy is 208,000l. less than that which we originally submitted to Parliament. The vote for the Army, including the militia and commissariat, is 150,200l. less; the vote for the Ordnance, 123,000l. less; the Miscellaneous Estimates, 235,500l. less. The proposal to embody a further militia force having been given up, there is a saving on that head of 150,000l. The whole of those reductions amount to 866,700l. But the increased pay of the pensioners having required a sum of 25,000l., and certain additions to the Miscellaneous Estimates a further sum of 13,200l., the actual reductions amount only to 828,700l. This is the amount of the reductions upon the original estimates we submitted to Parliament. I will now state the whole expenditure. The expenditure for the year is as follows:—31,280,600l. for the debt, and other charges on the Consolidated Fund; 7,518,610l. for the Navy; 7,012,795l. for the Army; 2,801,760l. for the Ordnance; 3,783,570l. for the Miscellaneous expenditure; 25,000l. for the pensioners—in all 52,422,335l. My noble Friend in his statement at the beginning of the Session estimated the receipts at 51,210,000l. But an arrangement having been made to pay the appropriations in and at once into the Exchequer, instead of allowing them to accumulate, and adding them to the revenue of the following year, a sum of 500,000l. becomes available this year, in addition to what we had calculated upon. I have stated before, also, that owing to the excellent barley crop of last year, malting has been carried on to a much greater extent than usual, and has consequently helped to increase the Excise revenue. The Stamp revenue has fallen off; but taking the two sources of revenue together, we may calculate on an increase of revenue above what we anticipated, of 340,000l. In addition to this, we have received 80,000l. as the last remnant of the China money, making altogether 52,130,000l. The deficiency of income below the expenditure is therefore 292,335l. This, considering our prospects at the beginning of the Session, is, I venture to think, not unsatisfactory. I stated to the House early in the present year, that I hoped they would give us credit for an anxious desire to reduce the expenditure as much as possible. I stated that it would not be possible to reduce the expenditure summarily and at once—that I indeed thought it would be exceedingly bad economy to do so; and that I hoped they would not press us to carry the reductions further than was really consistent with the best interests of the country, and with maintaining the efficiency of our establishments. My noble Friend stated that considerable reductions might he carried into effect next year, but that he could hold out little hope of much reduction being effected in the present year. I have shown the Committee, however, that even in the present year we have effected reductions to the amount of no less a sum than 828,000l., which I hope the Committee will accept as an earnest of our anxious desire to reduce the expenditure as far as possible. In the present state of the Continent, and considering how our trade is affected by the state of affairs there, it is very difficult to anticipate what our revenue may be next year; but taking the year as an ordinarily favourable one, I anticipate that, with the reductions which we shall be able to carry into effect, the income will more than equal the expenditure, in which there is, as I have stated, a deficiency of only 292,000l. I have now stated the ordinary expenditure of the country as compared with its income for the year. I have now to advert to the extraordinary expenditure. In the first place there is a sum of 1,100,000l. for the Caffre war, and 245,411l. for the naval excess, making together, 1,345,411l. Then there is a sum of 262,545l. for Irish distress, and 130,965l. for assistance to the destitute emigrants landed in Canada, making together, 1,738,921l. The total expenditure of the year is, therefore, 54,161,256l.; and the income being 52,130,000l., the deficiency is 2,031,256l. If I followed the course which has been followed before, I might propose to the Committee to charge this deficiency upon the Consolidated Fund, leaving the charges to be met at the end of the year by a diminution of the balances in the Exchequer; but I do not think myself justified in doing so. The House has already sanctioned the advance of considerable sums from that source. The Committee will remember that, some time ago, it was agreed to advance the sum of 2,000,000l. for the purpose of drainage in England and Scotland, and a further sum of 1,500,000l. for land improvements in Ireland, making together a sum of 3,500,000l.; of this sum there has actually been advanced, for England and Scotland, 180,000l.; and for Ireland, 330,000l.; together, 510,000l.; leaving 3,000,000l. of the sum still to be advanced. It is, of course, impossible to say how much of this may be demanded in the course of the year, but it may probably amount to one-third. As the works proceed, the charge upon the Consolidated Fund will necessarily increase; because, while there is great delay at the commencement of the works, when once they are in progress they will be carried on more rapidly, and the demand for the money to do so will be proportionately great. There is also a charge upon the Consolidated Fund of 70,000l. for New Zealand; another charge of 170,000l. for Trinidad and Guiana; and another of 50,000l. for Tobago: making, with some minor sums, a total charge on that head say of 300,000l. With respect to the sums advanced for drainage and the improvement of the land, I need not say that we have ample security. I have reason, from the report of the Board of Works in Ireland, to believe that in that country the average improvement will be about 8 per cent on the outlay—thereby supplying a source of increased income to the parties who have borrowed the money. With respect to Ireland, there can, I think, he no possible mode of improving that country half so good as that of putting it in the power of the proprietors themselves to improve their land, and also putting them in a position of benefiting the neighbourhood in which their estates are situated, by furnishing labour to the people, and acting as a benefactor to them in the most wholesome and sound of all ways—improving their character, at the same time that they are improving their condition. Having thus stated the sums with which the Consolidated Fund is chargeable at present, I have now to state that the plan which I propose for replacing the sums which have been drawn from the Treasury for these extraordinary services, and enabling it to meet the demands for advances which may be made upon it, is by borrowing to the amount of 2,000,000l. Different courses have been pursued, on former occasions, when it was necessary to provide for a deficient income. I find that in 1842 the following course was taken. In that year the estimated deficiency of income from the repeal and reduction of duties, and other causes, was 3,780,000l. The estimated amount of taxes imposed was 4,300,000l.; but the whole were not to be received within the year. Deducting one-half of the income-tax, 1,850,000l., not receivable within the year, the amount receivable within the year was 2,450,000l. The probable deficiency in April 5, 1843, therefore, was 1,330,000l. The actual deficiency, however, was 2,421,000l. Now the course taken at that time to meet this deficiency was to take a credit on the surplus of the Consolidated Fund for more than it could produce, and to meet the demand at the end of each successive quarter by a large issue of deficiency bills; and to such an extent was this done, that, on the 5th of January, 1843, the deficiency bills amounted to 8,567,729l.; and in the course of the ensuing April the amount borrowed was 7,549,440l. Such was the provision for meeting the deficiency of income in 1842. On the 29th of April, 1844, I find the then Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Goulburn), stating to the House that that deficiency had been completely extinguished by the surplus of the succeeding years. The right hon. Gentleman said—

"It will be in the recollection of the House that, it the close of the last year, I had to announce to the House the fact of a very considerable deficiency of income. I recommended to the House to make no provision whatever for the payment of that deficiency—not to raise money by loan for the purpose of getting rid of it, but to leave it to be defrayed out of the surpluses of future years, as circumstances might from time to time allow. And I am now happy to announce to the House that the deficit of last year, amounting altogether to 2,749,000l, has been cleared off and discharged out of the produce of the revenue of the present year."

Now, although in this case it was justified by success, I cannot disguise from the House that this is a dangerous course to pursue, and in the state of affairs at homo and abroad, it would not be at all justifiable on the present occasion. I propose to adopt a course which was pursued by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Tamworth in 1841. I find that on that occasion the money raised to satisfy grants on supply and interest on Exchequer-bills was 2,467,432l. I propose in the same way to meet the deficiency of the present year by taking power to raise the necessary amount by the issue of Exchequer-bills and the sale of stock. No person feels more than myself that in ordinary circumstances this is a most objectionable course to pursue. We thought it so objectionable that we proposed to meet the deficiency by increased taxation. The House, however, did not think it advisable to accede to that proposal; and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Stamford—no light authority on these matters—thought that we had good reason for abandoning the proposal, since the House and the country were not prepared to submit to increased taxation for two years for the purpose of defraying a temporary excess of expenditure. I do not, therefore, see what other course we can pursue. I do not think I should be justified in proposing a permanent tax for the purpose of covering temporary expenditure. I still think that for a temporary excess a temporary tax—and in the shape in which we proposed it—would have been the course most advisable; but that proposal having been rejected by the House, the next best course is to borrow the money in the way I have proposed. The circumstances in which the proposal is made are not of an ordinary kind. In the course of the last two years we have been called upon to deal with the questions of a famine in Ireland—commercial distress in England and Scotland—and revolution throughout Europe, which have affected this country both commercially and financially in no inconsiderable degree. I say nothing of insurrection at home. In such extraordinary circumstances, therefore, I conceive that we are justified in taking a course which would not be justifiable in ordinary years. I do not believe that the history of the civilised world records a greater destruction of human food than that which occurred in 1846, or such a demand for capital to replace that food. I will not say that the commercial distress of 1847 was the severest ever known; but it certainly ranks among the severest pressures that ever took place. Just when we were recovering from that distress, and when symptoms of reviving trade were appearing throughout the country, a series of revolutions took place on the continent of Europe, which, independently of other evils, put a check upon our export trade; and if anybody will refer to the returns of our exports, he will see to what an extent they have fallen off in consequence of the cessation of the Continental demand. Everybody will also recollect the effect of the blockade of the northern ports in consequence of the dispute between Denmark and Germany. All these matters have seriously affected our trade, and it must be the anxious desire of all of us to see an early termination put to these unfortunate occurrences. And having said this, I will only observe further, that any one who reflects upon it will see the deep interest which this country has in the universal prosperity of other countries. I have heard it stated that these occurrences abroad benefit this country; but they do no such thing. On the narrowest ground of our selfish interest it is infinitely more for our benefit that other countries should be happy and prosperous than that they should be the reverse; and, therefore, no effort we can make for the settlement of those questions can be more useful to those countries, or to the interests of humanity generally, than to the commercial and selfish interest of this country. Of course, in the uncertainty which prevails with respect to the state of affairs on the Continent, it is difficult to anticipate what expenditure may be required; but I hope not only that we shall be able to reduce the expenditure, but that the revenue will considerably increase. I wish to show to the House how, even under existing circumstances, the revenue has kept up to a degree which, I confess, has filled me with astonishment. Comparing 1845–6 with 1847–8, I find that the receipts in the former period were 51,258,465l., and in the latter 51,627,736l., being nearly 400,000l. more than in the former year. At the beginning of 1847 it became my duty to state to the House what the probable income of the year would be. Of course, it was impossible to anticipate the convulsions which have since taken place; but I stated, early in February, that my estimate of the ordinary revenue for the year 1847–8 was 52,065,000l. Well, in spite of those convulsions and the consequent stagnation of trade, the actual produce of the ordinary revenue was 51,627,000l., being only 438,000l. loss than that which I estimated it at the beginning of the year. When I mention that a diminution of no less a sum than 1,400,000l. took place on malt and spirits, arising from the failure of the spring crops, the Committee will see to what extent the general revenue must have been affected. I am happy to say that, taking the present quarter so far as it goes, the prospects of the revenue are anything but unsatisfactory. I find that the decrease on the whole ordinary revenue from April 8 to the middle of August, 1848, as compared with 1847, is only 115,000l.; while there has been an increase of the Customs and Excise duties in the same time of 500,000l. A portion of that was owing to the receipt of corn duties which were not receivable in the previous year; but, excluding the corn duties, the increase of the Customs duties is 22,000l. Without anticipating too much, and without being too confident with respect to the future, I think that the facts I have stated are satisfactory, as showing how, even under the adverse circumstances of this year, the revenue has maintained itself; and that the receipts had not fallen off so much as, looking to all the circumstances, might have been anticipated. They are also satisfactory, as showing the great power of consumption of this country; for, although our exports have fallen off, our imports have remained at a high point—a proof of the benefit of the cheapness which during the last twelve months has enabled the great mass of the people to provide themselves with the necessaries and many of the comforts of life. In another respect the circumstances of the country have been most satisfactory, and for which we cannot he too thankful—I mean the state of tranquillity and peace which has prevailed at home. For, if we refer to what has taken place abroad—though the last thing we have reason to look at with satisfaction is the distress of our neigh-hours—yet, if we compare the receipts of the Customs duties of Franco with the receipts of this country, the result is most striking; and ought to be a subject of deep reflection with those who have at any time shown a disposition to disturb the public peace amongst us. From that comparison they must see what an infinite disadvantage it is to themselves, and what misery must he entailed upon a country by any interruption of its internal tranquillity. A short time ago an account of the receipts of the French Customs fell into my hands, by which it appears that, during the first five months of the year 1847, the receipts were in pounds sterling 2,191,000l.; while for the first five months of the present year (1848) the receipts were 1,290,000l., being a falling-off of 901,000l., or 5–12ths in the latter period, as compared with the former. Now, the amount of Customs duties received in this country for the corresponding five months in the year 1847 was 8,308,000; and the amount received for the first five months of this year was 8,207,000l., being a falling-off of only 101,000l., or say 1–83rd part of the produce of the first period. I am sorry to say that, looking at the French Customs receipts in the month of May last, the falling-off was, as compared with the receipts of the preceding month of May, not less than one-half. This great deficiency in the receipts of the French Customs duties is unquestionably to be attributed to the extraordinary check which the disturbances of the public peace in that country have given to industry and the employment of capital among that people, and demonstrates how great are the sacrifices which a nation is compelled to undergo where such revolutionary movements occur. Thank God, nothing of that kind has hap- pened here; and that we have reason to be most grateful for the state of peace and tranquillity which has prevailed in this country, conferring, as such a state ever does, so many benefits upon all classes, but more especially the working classes of the community. With regard to the state of trade, without pretending to say that it is in a most flourishing condition, I feel fully justified in declaring it to be in a sound and satisfactory state. I find that the drain of bullion from the Bank, which was taking place some few weeks ago, has ceased; and that the amount of bullion has not only been maintained, but in the course of the last week has been augmented. In the week ending the 12th of this month the amount of bullion in the Bank was 13,365,000l.; while in the week ending on the 19th, it was 13,371,000l.; there being at both periods a reserve of about 9,000,000l. In considering this criterion of the condition of the country, one must always compare the state of the Bank at equal periods after paying the dividends. Now, I find that the amount of bullion in the Bank on the 19th of this month was about the same as it was on the 20th of May last; in the former period the amount being (as I have already stated) 13,371,000l., and in the latter 13,379,000; both periods being equally distant from the payment of the interest on the public debt. I think, therefore, we may assume that the state of trade, though not very prosperous, nor the demand for labour very great, is upon the whole satisfactory, especially when we bear in mind the cheapness of all commodities, and particularly of the raw materials upon which labour is employed. At all events, I think it may be fairly stated that we are in that position in which we may readily avail ourselves of any favourable turn which a more tranquil state of affairs on the continent of Europe may open to us. I do not think I should properly perform my duty if I did not advert to that topic about which every hon. Member must be naturally very anxious—namely, the prospects of the country in regard to the produce of the harvest. Considering the very unsettled state of the weather, the condition of the crops must necessarily be a source of great concern and anxiety. Without going into any lengthened details, I will state generally the information which I have received upon the subject. I am sorry, then, to say that in the west and south of England there has been a considerable failure of the potato crop; but from the north I have not received any account that, as yet, there are signs of injury to the root, at least to any great extent. The same also may be said with regard to Scotland, where I understand the crops have not hitherto suffered injury. There are, however, very different accounts as to the harvest; but I cannot discover from them that in general much harm has been done. In some parts of the country, more especially in the west, it is stated that, in consequence of the wetness of the weather, the corn has sprouted; but from the north of England and from Scotland the accounts are much more favourable, and there is no reason to expect that any great damage has been sustained. Indeed, I believe, that in respect to rain, which has been so very plentiful in this metropolis, there has been a want of it in some of the more northern parts of the country, and that the turnip crops have, in consequence, been injured. Upon the whole, however, I sec no reason for any great anxiety being felt in regard to the general produce of the harvest, so far as this country is concerned. With respect to Ireland the accounts are exceedingly various. Even at the same place the prospects at different periods have been very different. It would be quite impossible for me to go into details; and perhaps I shall best discharge my duty by stating what I believe to be the general result of the accounts which have reached me. I believe there is hardly any part of Ireland in which the potato disease has not in a greater or less degree shown itself. In the south the disease has appeared and disappeared and appeared again, according to the change in the weather; and in the north the accounts received are equally various. That in many places the root is injured, I am afraid is too true. The early crop has in various instances escaped; but with regard to the late crop, present appearances are not so favourable. The reports, however, from all parts of Ireland are, that so much larger a quantity of ground has been planted with potatoes this year than in almost any preceding year, that, even allowing for a very great loss from disease, still there is no reason to apprehend that there will not be a large amount of human food in the country, the supply from the larger quantity planted, approaching, even after the loss, to what it has been in former years, when the crops on a less area of ground were comparatively uninjured. I find, on referring to a Mayo newspaper which was put into my hands this morning, that this is precisely the view taken as to the crops in that county. The writer says—

"All the tops of the late plantings are becoming withered and black. We are not, however, without hope as regards the early ones, as, while the stalks are affected, the tubers continue generally excellent. Should the disease progress, this country is ruined. On the other hand, should it please God to stay the spread of the disease, from the quantity of ground under potato, much of the evil of the last famine would be forgotten amongst us."

It is, very difficult to ascertain accurately the truth of the case, with regard to the crops. There is—and not unnaturally so—a tendency on the part of certain interested parties to exaggerate the deficiency of the crops; and I am afraid that in some parts of the country the population avail themselves of the means put in their power, by misrepresenting the actual state of the produce of their farms, of working upon the benevolent feelings of others, and thus throwing themselves upon eleemosynary and, instead of doing their best to render any such assistance unnecessary. Doubtless numbers of people have been saved from starvation by the timely help afforded them in the last year or two; but it cannot be concealed that much demoralisation of the people has been caused, and that they are but too willing to depend upon charity, and Government assistance, instead of endeavouring to raise the food and adopt the means which are necessary for their subsistence. I therefore think—as my noble Friend has already stated—that according to the present amount of information obtained as to the real state of the crops in Ireland, it is impossible to foresee what amount of produce will be available for human food in that country. It is, however, quite certain that upon all former occasions when a scarcity has been assumed to exist, and, indeed, when it has really existed, there has been a much larger quantity of food in the country than anybody has at first represented there to be. So, in the present instance, my opinion is, unless, indeed, there be such a failure of the crops as to be unexampled even by the year 1846, that there will be an amount of food in Ireland adequate to support the people of that country for a considerable time. After what the hon. Member for Montrose has already stated, and after what has fallen from my noble Friend on a former occasion when speaking as to the state of the crops in Ireland, I think it would, on the one hand, he unjust to the suffering people of this country, and fatal to the ultimate welfare of Ireland, if any sweeping measure of relief were at once to he adopted; I hope and believe that it will not be needed; but, on the other hand, I think it would he wrong, and an act of cruelty, if under the extremest emergency we were to say that no assistance or relief whatsoever should be given to a suffering and starving population. With these views I consider it inexpedient to hold out an expectation of any large assistance being afforded; while I hope that to a limited extent the House will place confidence in us, and allow us, within moderate limits, to dispense such assistance as may be absolutely necessary. As to what the result will actually be, no one can pretend to foretell. It may be like the former visitation. I hope and pray not; but if it be, then it will be our bounden duty immediately to refer the case to the wisdom of Parliament. Without wishing, then, on the one hand, to hold out any general expectation of relief, yet, on the other hand, feeling that relief ought to he given whore it would be utterly impossible that life should he maintained without it, I think for the present we must wait till we see what the result of the harvest shall be. We must know what the produce of the crops is, and what the circumstances of the country arc, before we can decide what shall be the course we ought to pursue.

said, that whore men found themselves not in quite so bad a position as they anticipated, they were in the habit of congratulating each other on their good fortune. The House was in such a position, and was evidently in the vein to he pleased with a very little. It was a matter of serious consideration to find that after reducing the deficiencies from 3,000,000l. to 2,000,000l. they still required to borrow. This might be very well if there was a thriving population well employed; but when the state of the country, and the increasing burdens on account of the poor, were borne in mind, our condition was not one for congratulation. He regaetted that no hope had been held out of a diminution of the Army and Navy, as a temporary reduction of 826,000l, caused by the postponement of public works, could not afford any substantial relief to the country. In point of fact, with the exception of a saving on the head of militia estimates, not a single shilling had been saved. The naval and military force of the empire was at least twice as large as there was any necessity for. It could scarcely be credited, but such was the fact, that there were more armed men in Ireland in the service of the Government than there were voters. Let them look at the income and expenditure of past years. The national income from 1840 to 1843 averaged from 50,500,000l. to 52,000,000l., and the expenditure was proportionately small; but since that period the revenue, instead of being 50,000,000l. or 52,000,000l., increased in 1844 to 55,500,000l.; in 1845, to 57,000,000l.; in 1846, to 56,250,000l.; and in 1847, to 56,000,000l. In 1844, the expenditure on account of the Army and Navy amounted to 14,000,000l.; in 1845, to about the same; in 1846, to 15,600,000l.; in 1847, to 16,800,000l.; until in 1848 it amounted to 18,500,000l.; and the country had a just right to complain of such enormous additions to the public burdens. The actual taxation, including the cost of collection, about 4,000,000l., amounted to nearly 60,000,000l. As to the disturbances which had taken place in this country, he could scarcely have believed that men were to he found capable of such visionary, crude, and impossible schemes. It was, however, satisfactory to find that the proceedings which had recently taken place were not planned by the labouring classes of the country, but originated amongst the lowest and vicious of the community. Many persons were now suffering in prison who had openly given expressions to their political feelings who should no more be liable to be imprisoned than himself or any other hon. Gentleman. He had expressed himself as strongly on politics as many of those who were now in confinement; and he hoped that before long there would be an end put to such arrests. He trusted that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not raise his loan by the creation of stock, as great loss had been occasioned by previous transactions of the kind. In conclusion, he expressed his deep regret that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not announced any reduction in the Army and Navy.

Sir, I do not propose to follow the hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose, still less to dispute the statement he so frankly made, that he has held stronger language than that given expression to by those lately convicted under the Crown and Government Security Bill for sedition; and, I suppose I may add, treason and felony, for I remember the occasion upon which the hon. Gentleman advised the Canadian colonists to cast off the dominion of the British Crown. When the hon. Gentleman rose, he created some surprise at this side of the House by observing that the Chancellor of the Exchequer sat down amid general congratulations. Surely, if any such expressions of gratification were indulged in by hon. Gentlemen on the opposite benches, they must have been conveyed in a suppressed whisper, for they did not reach us. I do not think there is anything to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman upon, although I heard him congratulate himself that things were no worse. It appears to me, that a more insolvent statement could not be made by a Chancellor of the Exchequer; and the only consolation to derive from it is that, as things are so bad, they may soon get better. Such also was the right hon. Gentleman's hope in the spring of 1847. For my part, I think the best foundation he has for his congratulations, and his most consoling reflection, is very much akin to that of a certain gallant knight (Sir Hudibras) who, when imprisoned in the village stocks, expressed a hope that his dog-bolt fortunes might—

… "quickly end,

Or turn about again and mend."

The right hon. Gentleman told us, that various financial statements had been made to the House. Various and varying they were; for this is the fourth budget or explanatory financial statement with which we have been favoured. The right hon. Gentleman has gone to some pains to explain budget No. 4; but now that I have heard it, I am not sure I understand it. We have not been told that the corn duties were included in the statement. [The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER: They are always included.] Not "always;" for when the right hon. Gentleman made his financial statement in the early part of the Session, he forgot to include them. I understood the right hon. Gentleman to say, that there was an increase in the Customs of 22,000l. over the corresponding period of last year. [The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER: Exclusive of corn duties.] I understand, that 207,000l. had been received up to the 15th of June. So I presumed, that up to this time about 300,000l. had been received from corn duties. The House will recollect, that when the first financial statement was made, we were informed that there would be a deficiency of nearly 3,000,000l., and that such deficiency was to be made up by an increase in the income-tax yielding 3,500,000l. That proposal for an in creased tax upon incomes was subsequently abandoned; but we are now told that the malt duties have so much exceeded in amount the estimates framed by the right hon. Gentleman, that on the head of Excise there is already an increase over the corresponding period of last year of upwards of 500,000l. [The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER: I said the increase was upon the Customs and Excise.] If I understood the right hon. Gentleman, he said that the corn duties were not included in his statement of Customs. [The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER: I stated, that the increase upon the Customs and the Excise, taken together, was more than 500,000l. I also said, that there was an increase of 22,000l. in the Customs duties, exclusive of the corn duties.] Then we are to understand that there is a decrease on stamps, the amount of which the right hon. Gentleman is not prepared to state; and that upon the balance there is an increase of revenue on Customs and Excise to the extent of 500,000l. The right hon. Gentleman tells us, that it is his intention to provide for the deficiency, which is estimated at 2,000,000l., by selling stock; but, as the value of stock varies, to borrow money in such an irregular way is very like flying a kite. When looking forward to an increased surplus of revenue wherewith to reimburse himself, the right hon. Gentleman has forgotten to tell us to what source he looked forward with so much confidence for this increase of revenue; for the House will recollect that this corn duty, which, coming in at the present rate within the current eleven months, would yield 670,000l., will cease on the 1st day of February next. This shows, that there is a prospect not of an increase of revenue, but of a considerable decrease. Let me also remind the hon. Gentleman, that even on the head of sugar duties (one of the largest sources of revenue), his expectations are not likely to be realised, for although by increased consumption the amount of duties received may not be diminished, still it is most probable that from the article of sugar he will not derive any increased revenue. You are also going to reduce the copper duties, which last year produced 40,000l., and the year before 50,000l; and these things, taken together, indicate that there will he a diminution instead of an increase in the revenue. Really it appears to me as if the right hon. Gentleman is seeking to ape Sir Robert Peel; but he forgets that when Sir Robert Peel borrowed in 1842, that he put on a property-tax, which gave him 5,000,000l., and that at a time when there was something to look forward to. It is true Sir Robert Peel reduced the duty on timber, thus sacrificing 500,000l. or 600,000l., and that he made other reductions of duty to the extent of 1,000,000l.; but he compensated for the loss by the imposition of an income-tax. The policy of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer inclines, on the other hand, to the increase of expense, without removing any burdens, or without providing fresh sources of revenue. I say, therefore, that he is unwarrantably confident when he looks forward to an increasing surplus revenue to compensate him for his 2,000,000l. of deficiency. He is aware that there are no more instalments of China money, and therefore on all hands I say there is every prospect of a diminished income. With regard to expenditure, he tells us that there is a saving amounting to 828,000l. upon the various estimates; but that saving will have to be made up in future years. It is not as if he told us that great works would have to be finished this year, but, on the contrary, everything is to be postponed, as a charge upon the future greater than the present charge. Far from thinking we have subject for congratulation, I am of opinion that the right hon. Gentleman's prospects are the darkest and most obscure that can possibly be conceived. The right hon. Gentleman speaks of a prospect of increasing the surplus revenue; but how is he to make amends for his present deficiency, and what will justify this irregular mode of borrowing money by selling stock which he does not possess? When I look at the return that was presented to this House a few days ago, which shows that in the Customs duties there is a diminished receipt of 500,000l., and an increased expenditure to the amount of 40,000l. on account of collection, in addition to the salaries of extra custom-house officers and coast-guards to the number of sixty-two, I cannot agree with the right hon. Gentleman in thinking that we can depend upon a surplus revenue in anticipation. But it appears we are to part this year at a period when we might have postponed the budget until next year, and have amalgamated the budget of 1848 and 1849, with the prospect of meeting again in three or four months, with a virtual deficiency of two millions. With such prospects as those—apart from considerations of reductions of expenditure—I must say that I never heard a statement by any Chancellor of the Exchequer less a subject of congratulation, either to the House, to the country, or to myself, than the statement which the right hon. Gentleman has made this night.

wished to say a few words with regard to Ireland. No doubt in some parts of the country the gloomy anticipations which had been entertained would not be realised to the full extent. The potato disease was perhaps not so active or malignant as it had formerly been, but it was to he feared that it was making a steady progress; and it was much to be apprehended that if famine visited the country to anything like the extent that was threatened, the people would be in a most frightful condition, inasmuch as in the year 1846 and 1847 they possessed resources from which in the autumn and winter of 1848 they could not hope to derive any advantage. The case of Ireland was most melancholy; it called for extreme and anxious attention, the more especially as the recent attempts to create disturbance were not the acts of the people, they were merely the proceedings of rash, mad, and criminal persons. As regarded the conduct of the Government, it was in this matter most merciful; and he earnestly hoped that they would continue to show the same spirit.

said, all they had heard amounted merely to a postponement for one year of the imposition of fresh taxes, and the only thing Ministers seemed able to do, was to go on borrowing more money. On referring to a paper recently presented to the House, he found that the additions to the national debt, from the 1st of January, 1847, to the 1st of January, 1848, made a total of 7,933,259l.; and even that was not the whole deficiency, for the whole of the money sent to Ireland was borrowed, and England imposed upon herself, by that operation, a permanent annual expenditure of 200,000l. a year. It was quite evident that the country could not go on in that way much longer; The noble Lord had upon a former occasion said, that when the deficiency amounted to so much as 2,000,000l., that there should be no loan—no petty device; that taxes should be found to meet the deficiency. Now, when the noble Lord was beaten upon the tax that he had proposed, he ought to have submitted to the House some other scheme.

expressed his regret that, after thirty-three years of peace, a deficiency was still to be met by borrowed money, and by an addition to the national debt. If the expenditure were necessary and just, it ought to be met by existing resources.

thought, that the country had come to the ne plus ultra of taxation; and he trusted that the Government would at a future period be prepared to come forward with some plan adequate to the exigencies of the time. The imputation thrown out by any Irish Catholic bishop, that this country intended to starve the Irish people, though it might be passed over with the phrase that it was all "Tullagh-hill talk," was in plain, honest Saxon, nothing but a wilful and deliberate falsehood.

observed, that there was no ground to suppose any reason why, with the reductions that had been made, and those that might be undertaken next year, the ordinary expenditure should not be reduced to the income of the country. The hon. Member for Montrose had said, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not stated that any further reductions were to be made; but there had been in various debates declarations made by himself (Lord J. Russell), by the hon. Secretary to the Admiralty, and by other Members of the Government, that on every possible occasion reductions would be made with the view of bringing the expenditure within the income. At the same time, he did not at all regret having, in the present year, kept up the naval and military forces at the point at which they were now maintained. When complaints were made of the great amount of the Navy and the Army, he must say, that considering the events which had occurred on the Continent, considering the excitement which such events were likely to produce in this country, giving encouragement to misguided men to imagine that they had only to go out into the streets with knives and pistols in order to effect a revolution, and considering the attempts made in Ireland, he should have been sorry if, for the mere purpose of popularity, the Government had proposed reductions in the Army and Navy. He did trust, however, that circumstances would enable the Government to make further reductions. With regard to the statement made by the hon. Member for Limerick, he must say, that the Government claimed the confidence of the country for their intentions. He hoped that the potato failure was not so great as was apprehended a week ago, though he admitted that there was still ground for fear and alarm on that head.

observed that when the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the course of his statement, painted in rather gloomy colours the situation of the country, he not only referred to the bad harvests we had experienced, but especially to the disordered state of Europe; and one of the reasons assigned by the right hon. Gentleman for the disadvantages under which this country at present laboured was the blockade in the Baltic, which he spoke of as likely to last for a considerable time. That blockade, as was well known, occasioned great loss, and inconvenience, and injury to our merchants. He had before called the attention of the noble Lord and of the House to this subject, and especially to the fact that, when the blockade was renewed, it was renewed under much more stringent and severe conditions. He had formerly inquired whether Her Majesty's Government meant to fulfil a guarantee which this country had given to Denmark for the possession of Schleswig, and he quoted the treaty, which was very decided in its language, and which appeared to him scarcely to admit of doubt. The noble Lord (Lord Palmerston), however, said that it was possible the guarantee was not so very decided, and he hinted at two or three modes of interpretation which might leave it open to this country to free itself from the force of that guarantee. But since he brought the question of the guarantee before the House, the whole of the diplomatic correspondence which took place between the English Secretary of State (Lord Stanhope) and our Ministers at the Court of Copenhagen (Lord Polwarth and Lord Carteret), which had been found in the State Paper Office, had been published by a learned Dane, and the nature of the guarantee was no longer a matter of doubt. It was a guarantee which this country was as much bound to fulfil as it was bound to pay the interest of the national debt. He believed, that if when he (Mr. Disraeli) called attention to the subject, the noble Lord had acknowledged the weight of that guarantee, and had taken a decided course, they might have avoided some of the great inconveniences and injuries they had experienced. The noble Lord had boasted, the other night, of the good understanding which existed between Her Majesty's Government and the powerful Government of France. Now France had acknowledged the force of the guarantee of 1720; and he (Mr. Disraeli) thought the noble Lord could not do anything more sensible or just than to act in concert with that Government with reference to this guarantee, and by taking a decided course to terminate the vexatious blockade which the English merchants could no longer endure. The noble Lord had on a former occasion made a statement which gave an impression that the armistice which had originally been agreed to would be carried into effect by the Prussian Government; but he had since admitted that the hopes and expectations he had permitted the commercial world to indulge in, had not been realised. As the Chancellor of the Exchequer had so specifically alluded to the blockade, a good opportunity was afforded to the noble Lord to give the House some information on the subject. He wished to know what was the present state of the question; whether the armistice was going to be fulfilled; whether any arrangement had been made between Prussia and the German Confederation which would allow Prussia to act independently; whether Prussia could act independently; what was the nature of the relations subsisting between the Court of St. James and the Court of Berlin; and whether there was any probability of a termination of the blockade of the ports of the Baltic and the North Sea?

did not undervalue the importance of the subject to which the hon. Gentleman had called attention; but he was sure both the hon. Gentleman and the House would feel that, although it might be right on proper occasions for Ministers in that House to give full explanations with regard to matters in which the British Government alone was concerned, yet that it might not be altogether competent or proper for them to afford full explanations with respect to transactions between other Governments, in which transactions the English Government was only incidentally concerned. He must certainly admit that he had been very much disappointed with regard to the armistice. On several occasions he had held out to the House hopes and expectations which had not been realised; but he could assure the House that this had not arisen from any want of activity or earnestness on the part of Her Majesty's Government. The transaction in question was one in which many parties were concerned—the Danish Government, the Prussian Government, and the Government, varying from day to day in its character, at Frankfort, beginning with a Diet, passing into a National Assembly, and ending in a Vicar-General of the empire. The question had thus been embarrassed and complicated by the varying disposition and character of the Central German authority. If he were to go into details, he would have to explain the transactions which had taken place between the German authorities at Frankfort and the Government of Prussia; and he did not think, if he entered into those details, that he would advance the object they all had in view—a satisfactory solution of the Schleswig-Holstein question. He might, however, state generally, what he believed was in substance pretty well known, that the terms of an armistice between the Government of Prussia and the Danish Government were substantially agreed upon; that those terms were considered by the Prussian Government to require the assent of the Frankfort authority; and that that Frankfort authority had coupled the ratification with certain conditions which had for a time created delay and difficulty. He still hoped, however, that there might be, on the part of all concerned, a sufficient sense of the absolute necessity and paramount importance of bringing about, without further delay, a satisfactory settlement of the armistice, and, as resulting from it, a settlement of the Schleswig question. With regard to the guarantee of England, what he had endeavoured to point out on a former occasion was, that the present position of matters could not bring that guarantee into operation. In the first place, England was at present acting in some degree in the capacity of a mediator; and Her Majesty's Government could not combine the functions of a mediator with those of a party in the cause, which they would do if they undertook to act in pursuance of their guarantee. In the next place, the question at issue was not whether Schleswig was to be wrested from the King-Duke to whom it belonged, it was a question complicated in its nature, but of a different kind—namely, what should be the internal administration of Schleswig—whether it should he, as the Danish Government wished it to be, a constitution combined with that of Denmark, or as the German party wished, a constitution combined with the Duchy of Holstein? It was not therefore a question of conquest, or of the forcibly wresting of a territory from a sovereign, but of the internal organisation and administration of the duchy. He trusted, however, that the good sense which he hoped animated all the parties concerned, would lead to a satisfactory settlement of the question without bringing into operation the guarantee, the existence of which he did not deny, but which, in his opinion, did not at present bear upon the practical question at issue.

said, the noble Lord had informed them that, under his advice, the Crown of England had accepted the office of mediator. This being the case, he (Mr. Disraeli) wished to know how it was that, during that mediation more than 40,000 men, being different contingents of the Gorman empire, had arrived at the seat of war—a circumstance which had led to the renewal of hostilities and to the revival of the blockade? He thought that, the moment such a hostile demonstration took place, the noble Lord was perfectly free to drop his position as a mediator, and to enforce the stringent character of the guarantee.

Undoubtedly, if Her Majesty's Government had thought fit to declare war against Ger- many, it would have been perfectly easy to say that they would cease to be mediators, and would become belligerents; but that was not a course which it was deemed advisable to adopt. They accepted the mediation at the request of Denmark, and with the consent of the other party; and so long as they saw any prospect of settling the question amicably by negotiation, he thought that was the best course to pursue.

happened to be one of a deputation from Manchester who waited upon the noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) some months ago upon this subject. They stated the vast importance to them of the trade with the Baltic and Hamburgh, and they urged the noble Lord to act the part of the mediator, and not to change this character for that of belligerent; and the noble Lord would best meet the wishes of the manufacturing community if he could with honour maintain his present pacific posture of mediator. Now, as to the vote before the House, this was, after all, a little loan; disguise it as they might, call it selling stock or issuing Exchequer-bills, still they were going to add to the permanent debt of the empire. But they would not act thus as individuals; individuals, if they had not the money to spend, would retrench, and diminish their expenditure. A reduction of 800,000l. had been made since framing the estimates; was it not possible to retrench a little more, rather than increase our debt? He measured the strength of this empire more by our finances than by our armaments or number of ships; and he must maintain that if we added 2,000,000l. more to our permanent debt, then, in spite of all our military and naval force, we should present ourselves in a crippled position before the world. Nor was he sure that the Chancellor had told the House the whole case for the next year in regard to expenditure; and that all these marchings and countermarchings in Ireland, all these encampments and increased fortifications, would not end in a very heavy bill being brought in next spring. It was very well to say that the Caffre war was a casual expense that would not occur again; but we had an Irish war and an Irish famine staring us in the face. But if we spent all we could get, and ran into debt besides, we should always be finding some casualty arising and telling against us. The Chancellor of the Exchequer stated that he was insolvent, and yet he could make loans to Trinidad, to Tobago, New Zealand, and to the gentry of Ireland to improve their estates. We were just running the career which other nations had run, and which in the case of another nation we should condemn, but to which, in our own case, we seemed blind, and ready to treat England as if it had a charmed existence. That majority of the House, which in the spring refused a reduction in our armaments, and passed a vote authorising the expenditure, was bound to resolve to raise the money—to raise it during this Session, and to raise it by an additional tax, whatever discontent it might create.