On this page
-
Text (3)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
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.
Untitled Article
The appointment of the committee on the Income and Property Tax threatened to absorb the whole of Monday evening . Mr . H ume said : — " His wish was , that after the committee should have ascertained the working of the present system they should proceed to inquire whether any mode could be adopted to render the property tax fair and equal . Another object he wished to attain was to render the tax permanent . Therefore , his wish was to go into committee to see whether it was not competent to adopt some permanent system . With regard to the constitution of the committee , he did not care who were the members of it . All he wished was , that they should be willing to enter into a full and fair inquiry into the subject . "
He moved that the following gentlemen form the committee—namely , Mr . Hume , the . Chancellor of the Exchequer , Mr . Horsman , Mr . Henries , Mr . Labouchere , Lord Harry Vane , Mr . DiBraeli , Mr . T . Baring , Mr . Henley , Mr . Cobden , Mr . F . Peel , Mr . Roebuck , Mr . Ricardo , Mr . " Vesey , and Mr . B . Denison . Mr . Herbtes wished it to be understood that , although he might not have opposed the appointment of a committee , it was no part or condition of his assent to the tax being limited for one year
that such a committee should be appointed . His proposition was , * ' either amend the tax or abolish it ;" but the proposition of the hon . member for Montrose was , " amend the tax if you can ; but if you cannot , then you must adopt it as it is . " He had declined to serve on the committee ; and he objected to its composition as unfair to the landed interest . To Mr . Y . Smith it appeared doubtful whether a committee upon this subject ought to be appointed at all . The proposed committee was unfair to the landed interest . * ' Two of the countv members were from one
county—the West Riding of Yorkshire . { Hear and laughter . } He should infinitely prefer thatthere should be no inquiry at all made , or inquiry conducted by , the proposed committee . The Chancellor of the Exchequer had never expressed an opinion in favour of the committee . He had acquiesced in the proposition because it was unquestionable that Mr . Hume wanted one , and he thought that Mr . Disraeli sufficiently represented his party to be taken as an exponent of their views , consequently he concluded that a committee was desired by the House . He thought the committee unfairly constructed ; but Mr . Hume had difficulties to contend with . Not one colleague of the late Sir Robert Peel would consent to serve , nor any great financial authority opposite . He felt bound to vote < br the nomination of the committee .
Mr . Fkeshfield moved as an amendment that the order for the nomination of the committee be read for the purpose of being discharged . Mr . Disbaeli had not supported Mr . Hume ' s motion , under the idea that the appointment of a committee was to follow . { Hear , hear . ) At the same time , if Mr . Hume should propose the nomination of a committee , he should Ibel bound to vote fox it . Mr . Aghonby here warmly
protested against the attempt unfairly made to get rid of the committee . Lord John Russell revelled in the contradictions of the hostile majority of the 5 th of May . He described with great relish the clashing opinions of the members of that majority ; and he rallied Mr . Hume for having rejected the advice of Mt . Cobden , who said that if Mr . Hume wished for a modification of the income tax , he should have moved for a modification : —
" The honourable member , however , did not take that eourae , but ho took a third course , which it appeared was not intelligible to those who voted for it , viz ., to limit the income tax to one year . Some honourable members said , ' ^ Ve vote for the motion with the view of having , during that interval , an inquiry into the present mode of lcvving and assessing the income tnx . ' Other honourable members , who , however , were , not very prominent in the debate , said , an the right honourable gentleman the member for Stamford bad said to-night , 1 We vote for it as affording m another opportunity of dimmiishing the tax with the view to its ultimate abolition . ' It was evident , therefore , thai 2 < 'i () members voted lor the motion upon very different grounds , and , considering those different groundH , it wus no wonder there ahould now he such iniKunderstandingH . "
The ( government had accepted the motion in the nense put upon it by Mr . j I tune , and consented to a committee . He objected to the name of the Chancellor of the . Exchequer being on a committee which would he hostile to him ; hut ho could not vote for the discharge of the order uh proponed . The , grrateHt diviaion of opinion in the lloutie . scented to turn upon the quention rained by the amendment ; Mr . IIknlky supporting ' * » Mr . . Hooickk opposing it , and Mr . T . Haiunc ; refuniiitf to eminent , tit the tax being made permanent , without an investigation . Mr . ( , ohi > kn had concluded , na « matter of eourne , that when the motion wiih ailirnifd , the Hound would appoint , a committee us well as limit the ta * to one year . The JUouac divided : — Fur Mr . Frcuhfu ld '« amendment , 1 ) 4 ; against it , 193 . Majority , ' •>» Mr . Ilumc '» motion wan carried , and tho nomination of the committee agreed to be taken on Friday . TJie Mount ) J-lif-n went into committee on the Kccle-^ fcmw ) kr ' l '(} 4 « a . UiU . At tho outuet Mr . Walvole >^^ ajMtefU ' 3 tlit « l » tnt , of the course lit ) whonld pursue re-/ m P / Tv . ' ; -.
specting his amendments . He had obtained the declaratory clause , and for the proper working of the bill three things were essential : first , that they should lay down in the preamble the constitutional principles upon which they proceeded ; secondly , that they herald frame the law »© as to prevent further legislation , » nd that therefore they should introduce a provision making penal the bringing of any briefs into England ; and thirdly , that they should s ee that the law was enforced . For this purpose he thought the amendment of Sir F . Thesiger sufficient — which ¦ would give any one the right to prosecute , subject to the consent of the Attorney-General . Mr . Walpole moved to introduce into the second clause—which
prohibited , under a penalty , the assumption of titles to pretended sees or dioceses , &c , in the United Kingdom—words which extended the prohibition to the obtaining hereafter , or procuring from Rome , or publishing , or putting in use , any brief or other instrument in . writing , for the purpose of constituting within the kingdom of England a hierarchy of bishops named from sees with territorial titles derived from places belonging to the crown of England . The Attorney- General objected to this alteration , the effect of which would be , he said , to impose a cumulative penalty for one offence . A discussion ensued as to the strict meaning of the
amendment . Mr . Walpole explained that by it he intended to confine the operation of the clause to England . An outcry was raised , supported by Ministers , that Mr . Walpole wanted to enact one law for England and another for Ireland , and the principle involved in that distinction only found one defender , Mr . Hobsmak , who had the courage to say that he hailed the enunciation of that principle with great pleasure . The amendment was , however , so strongly opposed , even on his ownside , that it was withdrawn . The debate then turned upon an amendment moved by Mr . M'Cullaoh , to exempt from its operation persons who shall have been recognized as Roman Catholic archbishop of any province , Roman Catholic bishop of any diocese , or Roman Catholic dean of any
deanery by her Majesty ' s superior courts of law or equity . This amendment was vigorously opposed . Mr . Reynolds declared that if the bill passed , neither the Roman Catholics of England nor Ireland would be able to perform their religious duties without the consent of the Attorney-General . A storm arose , when Sir W . Yerner . asked indignantly : — " Was the House , was the country , to yield to a couple of dozen of Roman Catholic members , who were not allowed an opinion of their own , but forced to obey the desire of their clergy ? ( Hear , hear . ) He would say , repeal the bill of 1829 . " Mr . Revnolds , in his good-humoured sarcastic way , hoped there would be an end to the Dolly ' s Brae and Battle of the Diamond talk of the honourable
baronet and his friends . The Protestants of Ireland did not respond to the honourable baronet's sentiments , as lie ( Mr . Reynolds ) would tell him to his head . ( " Qtiestion , " and groans . ) Was it English fair play to call " Question " when he stood up to defend his creed and country against the language of the hon . baronet , to which they had listened in silence ? (?? Oh , oh , ' and "Question" ) Thecommittee divided : — For the amendment , 45 ; against it , 291 . Majority , 246 . Mr . Moore moved another amendment in the same clause , to insert , after " the United Church of England and Ireland , " the words " a 9 long as the said Church shall continue to be the United Church of England and Ireland . " The opposition was by this time wearied out , and the committee , after half an hour's debate , divided : —
For the amendment , 36 ; against it , 240 . Majority , 204 . On the motion of Mr . Reynolds , the chairman reported progress , and hrul leave to sit again on Friday ; and the House adjourned at a quarter to one o ' clock . In the House of Lords on Monday the proceedings were of little importance . Lord Lyndhukht brought tho attention of the Chancery reform under the notice of tho Houkc ; but , us the Lord Chancellor complained without uny other apparent object than that of recommending that tin ; proposed Chancery Reform Bill should be considered in reference to the admirable act of Sir John liomilly ' s now in operation in the Irish court .
lhe MarringcM India Hill wns committed , pro forma , on Tuesday , tohcreprintcd withamorulimntH . The Earl ot Ki . i . knuorouoh objected to the bill , on the ground that it wiih totally unfitted for India , where there wuh no arintocraey , and where no man couM command bin place of residence for twenty-one days , inasmuch as all wero the ticrvanta of the Htate , and muut obey itH orders . The bill wus faulty in two ienpectH , first , it throw impedimenta in the way of marriage in India ; ami , next , it would create more bigamiHtM than existed at present in that country owing to the clause relating to invalid marriages . The County Courts Extension Bill was read a neooiid time .
When the House of Common * met on Wednesday , a nhort and aharp discussion wuh raised by Sir Joshua Wahnsley , about the "No House" on Tuesday . The complaint raised wan , that tho Hcrvuntw of the
House had not properly given notice to members serving on the committees . Lord Mblocnd moved the second reading of the School Establishment ( Scotland ) Bill . Having shown that the existing provisions for educating the people of Scotland wore inadequate , a proposition no one in the course of the debate denied except Sir George Clerk . The substance of Lord Melgund ' s plan lies in the following statement : — " The object of the bill was to maintain two principles inviolate—first , to establish the principle of local taxation , with a certain amount of local management ; next , to place on the same school-benches children of all
religious denominations , and to unite them in the same studies , which might be done , he contended , without danger to their religious principles . The religious teaching in the old schools of Scotland , whether of parishes or under other systems , consisted solely of reading a portion of the Bible as a school lesson , and teaching the children the shorter catechism . ' He was convinced that , dp what they might , it would be impossible to conduct the business of schools on any other assumption than that practical , secular , and religious education must be separate . He thought it was a fallacy to say religious must be mixed up with secular education ; and , in point of fact , the separation had been universally
practised in the schools of Scotland . The opposition to the second reading was made on the ground that the people of Scotland were opposed to the principle of the bill ; that it offered no more security for the education of the people than the existing system , because its provisions were not compulsory but optional ; that pure secular instruction was dangerous ; and that it would take the superintendence of education out of the hands of the presbytery of the bounds . Mr . Macgregor contended that the provisions of the bill were satisfactory to the majority of the Scotch people . The Lord Advocate and Lord John Russell were the chief defenders of
the bill . Lord John Rvsskll rose to reply to Sir Robert Inglis , who charged him with inconsistency in rejecting Mr . Fox ' s plan and supporting that of Lord Melgund . " But there could be no two proposals more distinct than these two . The proposal of the honourable member for Oldham was that schools should be established for secular instruction , the words " secular instruction being introduced for the purpose of excluding religious instruction , and implying that secular instruction only should be taught , and that these schools should be supported by a parish assessment . But the bill now before the House enacted that the boards established under the bill should take measures for education , and , although the bill did not exclude Bchools for secular
instruction , he should understand that general word " edu cation " to imply religious instruction , which -would accordingly be included and provided under the bill . The only difficulty with regard to religious instruction would be if all the parochial committees should be of opinion that religious instruction ought not to be given in the schools , and that secular instruction alone should be imparted . But , knowing the opinions of the people of Scotland , and how unanimously they were agreed upon this subject , and remembering , indeed , the history of Scotland in this respect , he did not doubt that , if the committees were established under this bill , there would hardly W an instance in which secular instruction only wouM be given in the schools . ( Cheer : )"
The Established Church was not la a condition to undertake the superintendence oi education in Scotland ; and , although the Free Church and the United Presbyterian Church offered from the Established Church , yet they did not differ from it or from each other in any m »« er which it was necessary to teuch to the children in these schools . { Hear , hear . ) " He agreed with Sir R . Inglis in that great panegyric which ne had passed upon the parochial schools , and that they had been useful . He should agree with the honourable gentleman also in a panegyric upon the turnpike roads of England and upon the ancient oil lamps that uaed to illuminate our streets . They had been great improvements upon the roads and the darkness of a state of barbarism ; but he did not see why we should not seek to improve these and other things in our day , as our ancestors had improved in their day . { Cheera . ) '
After Sir George Clerk had endeavoured to show that additional means were not required , and , if required , could be found in the extension of the present system , the House divided : — For the second reading , 124 ; against it , 137-Majority against , 13 . The House adjourned at half-past five . In the morning sitting on Thursday , the House of Cummonu went into committee on tho t it . Alban » Bribery Commisnion Bill . Mr . John Stuart , i" » long apeech , meant to bo nareostic , but which wa « simply dull , opposed further progress , and moved that the chairman should leave the chair . Aft < - ' some discussion he withdrew his motion , and a division whs taken on the motion that tho chair man report progress . For reporting progress , 10 ; agahidt it 54 . Majority , 44 . The House rcnumed and adjourned till five o ' clock . When tho House ngnin assembled , Sir Gbokom Grmy moved the H « cond reading of the Metropolis Water Bill . Mr . B . Ooohkamh mot this by « u amendment , which ho afterwards withdrow , 1 > J " porting that no bill for tlio supply of . W » it ° } °
Untitled Article
PARLIAMENT OF THE WEEK .
Untitled Article
526 ftt )? 3 Lta % eV . [ Saturday ,
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), June 7, 1851, page 526, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1886/page/2/
-