On this page
-
Text (1)
-
748 THE, LEADER. [Saturday,
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Paeliamefe Of The Week. " Coterbwiew* Fi...
India were properly" applied it would tie useless for America any longer to expect to compete with India in the production of cotton . Mr . "V . Scully expressed a hope tliat the right 'froa . gentleman would earaestly turn his attention to a reform of the land tenure of India . By so doing itte prosperity of that country would be based on a / sound foundation . He liad a letter from Poona-h , -which described in the most graphic terms the > wretchedness of the peasantry , and the sufferings ' they endured from famine . ' r The resolutions were agreed to . >¦ > ¦ ' . ,-. APPOINTMENTS UNDER THE ARISTOCRATIC SYSTEM . i- ' On Tuesday , Mr . F . Ijucas took advantage of a i technical opportunity to call the attention of the ¦ House of Commons ( about 50 metnbers present ) to the " Edmund O'Flaherfcy case . " 1 The words of the notice on the paper were these z—
" On consideration of the Consolidation Fund ( Appropriation ) Bill , as amended , to ask a question of the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to the office of the Special Commissioner of Income-tax in Ireland ; and to call the attention of 'the House to circumstances connected with the appointment © f persons intrusted with the collection of the revenue . " , The reasons which had induced him to give this notice were , said Mr . Lucas , these :- — " There had been for a considerable number of weeks past in the public journals statements of a very painful and unpleasant kind , that a certain gentleman who had been appointed , it-was understood , by the Chancellor of the Exehe-> quer , about a year and . a half ago , to a place of great 'trust and confidence , had absconded- —or , at least , had left the coUntry- ^ having , as it vras stated , committed forgeries to
lUie extent of from 14 , D 0 ( w , to 20 , 000 * . He did not say that these forgeries had been committed , but the public journals did say that they had been , and by a gentleman who lad , not much more than a year ago , been appointed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to a place of great trust and confidence . He bad waited , week after week , in the hope that some other personwould bring the matter before the ^ Honse , bat , no one having done so , he had felt it to fee a idnty to mention the matter , at however late a period of the session . On the 5 th of July last , a statement was made in -the . Times newspaper that this gentleman , a Special Conrmis'^ oher of the Income-taxin Ireland , had absconded under pecul iar arid not very reputable circumstances . This statement " of the 5 th of July was repeated in the same journal on ^ the 12 th of the same month , at much creator leneth and
. ui ' , much fuller detail , and it was distinctly stated that this ¦ ge ' ntleman had quitted the country , having committed forgeries to the extent of between 14 . Q 00 Z . and 20 , 000 ? . Mir . O' ^ laherty , the offender in question , had , before the . Tmngarvan committee , svvorn that the appointment had been . conferred upon him by the right honourable gentleman . ' wholl y unsolicited by himself , or by apy of his friends or afiquaintaTices ; that ho had never in his life applied to the ¦ "Obvernment , directly pr indirectly , for any place on the face ' of the earth ; and that the appointment bad been conferred jtipoa him by the right honourable gentleman as a purely Voluntary and unsolicited pledge of the right honourable ' ^ ntleman ' s personal friendshi p for him . Now , if the right lijNipurable gentleman contradicted this sworn evidence , and told them that there wore corresnnndnnc . o nml tpctimnniula
ift , $ onnexi 6 ri with this appointment to which he must refer . before he could explain too matter , mosfc assuredly , ho would ta , ke the slightest word of the right honourable genfcloman in . preference to the sworn evidence of the ex-Special Commissioner of Income-tax . ( l Hear hear ] and laughter . ) The " appointment ; of Special Commissioner of Income-tax in Ire-. lkhd was one of far higher importance than the commissionerships of income-tax in England , involving more responsible . Jpnctious , and conferring far higher powers . It was a place ' of very great trust , of large discretion , of extensive authority , which gave to a dishonest holder the opportunity of committing almost unlimited fraud , and to a partisan holder the opportunity of committing the utmost wrong and injustice towards political opponents . By the agenoy of compositions tor incometax
-, allowances , exemptions , and in fifty other ways , the Special Commissioner of Income-tax in Ireland jh ' ad tho means , were lie base enough , of perpetrating Hr > y amount of fraud . The holder of such a post ought to' be a man by his sooial position above tho temptation to dishonesty , and by his personal character above tho suggestion of partiality or unfairness . But how stood the case as to Mr . O'Flaherty ? Was his pecuniary position such as to render him exempt from all suspicion of liability to temptation ? Why , bo far from hia possessing tho flualf-# oa , t » 9 n of 5000 / . of real , or of 200 J . por annum of personal woperty , everybody , at tho time of his appointment , know J # } 0 . was a man wl < ° lia ( 1 n 0 proporty at all ; thai on tho Contrary , ho was a man weighed down by debt , that ho had itot a single farthing in tho world oloar of his heavy debts and engagements—of itaolf a sufficient reason why ho should not havo been nominated to tho post , contrary to the whole ni / uiutii niu jivji / yyihi uio
— o , uu w stnoc impartiality which should characterise euoh an officer , everybody know that M * ., 0 'Flaliorty ' a solo recommendation to tho right hon . gon-Wflman ' s pntronago hail boon his unhesitating devotion to the Gatfornmont « b a , political partisan , his unquestioning uotivity W > apolitical agont . Ho had himself no personal knowlodgo 0 % Mr . O'FIahorty , but from hia knowledge othorwiaoof that fj oiUlman , ho was prepared to say that there was no man MVlrolnnd to whom ho ahould have boen more unwilling to Bjiltmit hlrt private acoonntg ; and lie w « s prepared tooxproaa l | i $ belief tlint this feolinff m » a shared hy all persons in that ° appointment . Tho appointment of Mr . fltonor Wfla u jnosfc rcprohonaMo act , but tho irtpUvos for it were tho
most high and honourable that could be imagined ; every one admitted that the appointment of Mr . Lawley was most reprehensible , but every one conceded that the motives for it were of the highest and roost exalted character ; and so the motives foT the appointment of Mr . Edmund O'Flaherty , a dabbler in bill transactions , a furious political partisan , a person in whom no class of his fellow-citizens could place the slightest confidence , might have been the most high and honourable , although the appointment itself was a most
reprehensible and damning proceeding . Mr . Gladstone replied very quietly , and cleverly evasively . Why had Mr . Lucas given him only one day ' s notice of this motion ? "Why had Mr . laicas not waited until Mr . O'Flahorty ' s brother , a member of the House , was in his place ? ( Mr . O'Flaherty , M . P ., would take care not to be present—so that the question is—why did not Mr . Lucas wait till next session , or the session after that ?) Mr . O'Flaherty had ceased to be Income-tax Commissioner hefore
he absconded , the office having been abolished : Mr . O'Flaherty had not taken any public money : and what had Mr . Gladstone to do with Mr . O'F . ' s private misdeeds ? As to Mr . O'Flaherty ' s character , previous to the appointment being made , it was represented to him ( Mr . Gladstone ) as first-rate . " With regard to his fitness for the office , he ( Mr . Gladstone ) had taken pains to obtain the most competent person , and he had consulted the Secretary for Ireland , who recommended Mr . O'Flaherty , whom he had believed to be are . spectable person , and he knew nothing of his partisanship . He was a brother of a member of the House who was spoken of in terms of warm esteem by persons on whose judgment
he placed the firmest reliance . The subject would then have dropped ; but Mr . Di 3 raelt did not faiL to remind the House that this Mr . O'Haherty was the person who , on the occasion of the Kepgh scandal , was offered as evidence ( on his " honour" ) that lord Naas , Mr . Disraeli ' s Irish Secretary , had offered the Irish Solicitor ^ Generalship , under / Lord . Derby , to the Mr . Keogh , for whose appointment by Iiord Aberdeen the Coalition was attacked by Lord Derby ' s Lord-Lieutenant . Mr . Disraeli asked—Did any one believe that now ? No one answered : — -not even Mr . Iveogh . The subject did then drop .
THE BRIBERY BIIX . This bill was read a third time in the House of Lords on Monday night . A slight debate took place with reference to the clause legalising " travelling expenses , " to which the Marquis of Glanrica-rbe strongly objected . Ultimately the Duke of Newcastle , to the astonishment of the House , undertook to withdraw the claus e , thus leaving the law to remain as at present—that is uncertain . There was a division ; but four peers only voted for retaining the clause . The Lords' Amendments were tak ^ n into consideration in the Commons next day : Lord John Russet mildly moving that tliese amendments be agreed with , suggesting that , " at that period of th e session , " there was no time for disagreement . A long battle ensued .
Lord Hotham adverted to what he considered the singular and almost unprecedented position in which this motion placed the House , and to the manner in which , and the time at which , the amendments were made . He had never yet seen , he said , a Minister ask the concurrence of the House to an amendment madq "by the House of Lords in an opposite sense to that in which he had repeatedly spoken and voted , and , jLn effect , to stultify itself . The only resource
for those who objected to tho omission of the 26 th clause (" relating to travelling expenses ) at this moment was the extreme measure of moving an adjournment ; but ho implored tlie noble lord not to reduce them to the alternative of cither taking a course moat repugnant to their feelings , or of making a base and pusillanimous surrender of their conscientious duty . Ho moved that the further consideration of this particular amendment be deferred for a month .
Lord J , Russeli . observed , that the clause in question waa not in hia bill wiien first brought in , nor was it a primary object of tho measure . When the subject of tho declaration -was discussed , it was considered that there should be a clear definition of what were legal expenses , and ho had therefore advised tho House to agree to thia clause , legalising travelling expenses . Tho motion of Lord Hotham , if oarnod , would of course defeat tho measure . Mr . Hiloyard urged tho necessity of insisting upon tho retention of thia clause lotting the responsibility of making a crusade against tho franchise of the poorer claas of voters roat with tho House of Lords . Mr . Humh aaid ho had hitherto taken no part in the discussions upon this bill , believing it would bo ineffectual without tho ballot , hut ho approved tho omission of thia clause . Voters should como to tho poll at their own expense .
The SriflAKEu having explained to Lord Hotham that the effect of Iub motion would bo to defeat the bill , lord Hotham said that was not hia object , which was merely to provent tho agreement of tho Houao in tho omission of this particular clauBe . Mr . T . DffNQOMBJs , after etrongly condemning tho
resolution of the House of Lords limiting the period for passing bills , observed that the defeat of this bill would be no real loss ; he believed it would prove a mockery and delusion , and he should moxe to continue it for twelve months only . Sir J . Pakikotok thought it was not for the credit or character of the House that , in the middle of August , with a bare quorum , it should be called upon to reverse a determination which had been arrived at by a full House . He should vote for the motion of Lord Hotham , even if its effect would be to defeat the bill , which ho believed , with Mr . Duncorebe , would prove a delusion . Mr . G . Butt , Mr . Wilkinson , and Mr . Cavlev spoke in favour of agreeing with the Lords' amendment .
Mr . Mauns supported Lord Hotham ' s motion , and called for an explanation of the extraordinary circumstances of a member of the Cabinet in the House of Lords moving the omission of a clause which had been proposed and supported by his colleagues in this House . After a few remarks by Sir C . Burrmi , against the Xords' amendment , and by Lord R . Grosvenor in its favour , the motion of Lord Hotham was negatived upon a division by 78 to 21 . Lord Hotham then , in conformity with the intimation he had given , moved that the House do adr journ , and this motion was likewise negatived upon a division by 84 to 16 . fttr . Hume moved that the debate be adjourned .
Lord ; J . 'Russeix expressed a hope that the question would be fairly decided upon the issue , whether the House would agree or disagree with the Lords * amendment . After a further discussion , a third division took place , which negatived the motion for an adjournment of the debate by 81 to 15 . Lord HoTMam thereupon moved that the House ( which was getting thinner and thinner ) do adjourn , and this mo tion being negatived upon a division , Mr , MalinS proposed , as a compromise , as no notice had been given to absent members of the subject of discussion , that the debate should be adjourned until Thursday . He accordingly moved its adjournment .
Lord J . liossELt said it was quite obvious that an adjournment of the debate . until Thursday would give great advantage to Lord Hotham ; the debate would be prolonged , and the prorogation would be postponed , or the bill would be lost . This motion , after another discussion , was negatived upon a division . Another motion for the adjournment of the House met the same fate . Lord Hotham then moved the adjournment of the debate ; but , at the suggestion of Mr . T . Duncombe , a compromise -was at length effected by Lord J , Russell assenting to the limitation of the bill to one year , and until the end of the next session of Parliament , and Lord Hotham thereupon withdrawing his opposition . . . »
The bill was am ended accordingly , and the omission of the 26 th clause , with the other Lords' amendments , was agreed to . THE RUSSIAN SK 0 U 1 UTIES W 1 UU This bill came before the Lords on Wednesday . Lord Foutesctjb moved a resolution , suspending standing orders , and calling upon tho House to consider the second reading . The Duke of Nkwcaste e seconded the motion : — "He was not prepared to any that tho billeven in
the-, fom > in which it came up from the House of Commons , mis rendered vory necessary on account of the existing state of tlio Jaw . Ho would bo sorry to recognise tho essential necessity ot such legislation , but tho bill had been denuded of many ot tho objectionable provisions which ho had reason to behove it contained when it was originally presented to tlw othor House . Ho would bo most unwilling , either for himself or # on the prut of tho Government , to throw any obstuo e in tho way of a measure which was considered mtcossanuy tho other Houao of Parliament- wit-. li Mm i-ir >« r n f , > a *;* r- , t
,, Her Majesty s Government in maintaininc tho interests «> t Una country in its conflict with Kiishw . Jh wished to stnt <> , however , that tho subject to wliich this bill referred liutl not boon neglected by her MiyoHty ' n Government . When an announcement w « a made upon tlm Kx « liango in this country and in other countries that KutiKia wn » about to enaoavour to contract a loan , her Majesty's Government , without a moment ' s delay , took tlio opinion of tho law oillccxs ot tho Crown as to how far it would bo logul for British sulijocta to have , any concern in such a loan , tho obvious intention ot whwh wnato enable a foreign Power to rnit » o forces ndvono to thlH notion and Grown . Tho law ofllcors cnvo n cubtinet and poaitivo inion tlint
. op any Hrilinh subjects wlx > woio parties to imch a loan would bo guilty of high treason . 1 hereupon , without twenty-four hours delay , the noblo earl at tlio liotul of tho I-oroign Department wrolo to all o « r Mi . jiaU-.-s at ( oreign courts , and to all our con » ul » nbroml , desiring them to glvo u public intimation that Brilinli ButyeotH would incur theno heavy ponalticH if they involved UiainaolvoH in nny transactions connected with tho proposal loan . lo show that those stops won , taken on l ! i « jtinnnt , ho mi Kht mention that so . no thno back roi > ll « t >«« boon received from tho United Status of Amorli-n , to tlio instructionn which had boon « ont out to tho agents ol i . t 2 L - 7 . ' - ° . ' ? M « VM /« Government liad al . su ooinmumofttod with tho Ministers of this country at foreign Uourta , iiratruoUug thorn to muko onnicsl appeals to tim vourts to which thoy were accredited , dculriiig thono Courls
748 The, Leader. [Saturday,
748 THE , LEADER . [ Saturday ,
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), Aug. 12, 1854, page 4, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_12081854/page/4/
-