Before the second reading in the House of Lords, the Earl of Derby summoned the members of his party to his house, and consultation was held as to the course to be pursued. On the 22nd of July the ordeal of the bill commenced in the House of Lords. Lord Derby moved the second reading. He entered into an eloquent historical retrospect of the history of reform, and recommended that the bill be read a second time. boroughs and counties which were to have an increased | but not nemine contradicente, for a single member gave a or reduced representation, or were to become, for the negative. first time, constituencies sending a member to parliament. There were numerous proposals to alter the government scheme, by substituting other places for those which it was proposed to enfranchise, or to increase the representation. But the government, in the main, carried the schedules, as brought before the committee. Before the close of these discussions, the leader of the house announced to the committee the names of the gentlemen intended by the government to act as commissioners for regulating boundaries, subject to the ultimate approval of both houses. This announcement caused some angry discussions on the ground of alleged partiality in the selection, and the government leader had to revise his list. Finally the committee decided apon confiding the difficult and delicate task to Viscount Eversley, Sir John Duckworth, Mr. Russell Gurney (Recorder of London), Sir Francis Crossley, and Mr. John Walter. The bill had gone into committee on the 2nd of May, and the work of revision was not accomplished until the 9th of July. On that day the preamble was read-the last event in the consideration of a bill in committee. This was done amidst the loudest cheering perhaps ever before heard on reading the preamble of a bill, and was unanimously passed. However, all discussion had not yet terminated, for the bringing up of the report led to a series of proposals; which were, however, all rejected except one, which was of some magnitude. A clause was inserted, specifying a number of offices under the crown, which a member might accept, who already held some other office. This was supported by some from constitutional jealousy of the crown, and by others from apprehension as to the working of the new popular franchise. On the 15th of July the important event of the third reading came off. The debate lasted only a single evening, and degenerated into mere party recrimination. This party warfare was as usual led off by Lord Cranborne, who inveighed almost with vindictive eloquence against the government, and a dry mocking banter at the Liberal side of the house. Some anger and some laughter were the only effects of the noble lord's diatribe-the passage of the bill was not detained. Mr. Lowe was as usual very eloquent, and as usual put forth much and doleful vaticination, none of which ever came to pass. He said the house was now closing an era of prosperity and confidence, in order to enter upon a new epoch of change and revolution. The bill was founded on the principle of equality, and on the presumption that all men were equally entitled to the franchise. He protested against this dangerous innovation. Now, however, that the house had declared in its favour, all he could do was to express a hope that the people would be educated up to the standard to which they were to be raised. For his own part, he would have endeavoured to prevail upon his master to learn his letters before giving him so much power. But as matters now stood, all he could do was to urge upon the house the necessity of turning its early attention to the education of the people, in order to avert the consequences of a measure which every honest Englishman regarded with shame, scorn, and indignation. This finale was received with loud laughter, and the right hon. gentleman was pertinently reminded by a succeeding speaker that the most honourable and accomplished men in England had given their aid to frame and carry or support this measure. It was remarkable that the Adullamites, as the party of the old high Whigs was called, with the exception of Lowe, accepted the bill as a satisfactory settlement. The reply of the chancellor of the exchequer was extremely effective, and elicited loud and continued applause. The bill passed the third reading without a division, Earl Grey proposed an amendment, followed by a very ineffective and unwise speech. The amendment was, "That the Representation of the People Bill does not appear to this house to be calculated, in its present shape, to effect a permanent settlement of this important question, or to promote the future good government of the country; but the house, recognising the urgent necessity for the passing of a bill to amend the existing system of representation, will not refuse to give a second reading to that which has been brought to it from the House of Commons, in the hope that in its future stages it may be found possible to correct some of its faults, and to render it better fitted to accomplish the proper objects of such a measure." The Earl of Shaftesbury spoke against his own party, and voted for the measure. His speech was very effec tive, and appeared to influence several noble lords. The chief addresses on the occasion were made by the lord chancellor, Earl Russell, and Earl Granville, and all supported the second reading. Earl Grey, finding that he had no support, withdrew his amendment. The second reading was carried. The committal of the bill was moved on the 29th of July, when Earl Derby was absent from illness, much to the disadvantage of the progress of the measure. Eventually the bill passed their lordships' house with several important amendments. On returning to the commons the amendments were discussed with impartiality, conciliation, and much practical sagacity. Some were agreed to and others were refused. A conference between both houses was conducted in a spirit of mutual concession, and "the bill," the most momentous in importance perhaps ever passed by the legislature, received the royal assent on the 15th August, and became law. The rejoicings of the people were very great, and of parliament hardly less so. After the Reform Bill for England and Wales had passed through its dangers and its difficulties, the Scotch and Irish members were importunate to know how their respective countries were to fare in the matter of reform. With regard to Scotland the outlines of a bill had been stated in the House of Commons by the chancellor of the exchequer on the 13th of May, but in consequence of the vast amount of time consumed in the discussions upon the English bill and the advanced period of the session, at a time when those discussions were not complete, it was supposed on all hands to be necessary to defer any measure for Scotland until another session. The proposals made concerning the borough franchise, it had been announced, would be the same as that of England, making allowance for the difference in the law of the two countries. It would be founded on the same principle as to the payment of rates. There was no compounding for rates in North Britain, and therefore every householder would have a vote. The franchise to counties would be reduced to the same scale as in England, and the property franchises untouched by the bill for the latter would be untouched there. With regard to the distribution of seats, the right hon. gentleman reminded the house that the Reform Act of 1832 added eight members to the representation of Scotland, making fifty-three. He proposed to add seven to that number. Out of these two would be given to the Scotch Universities, one to Edinburgh and St. Andrew's united. and one to Glasgow in union with Aberdeen. Three | Fenians in custody. In the following December, 97 new additional members were given to counties, to Lanark- warrants were issued, in January 17, and in February 9. | shire, Ayrshire, and Aberdeenshire each one, and these On the 22nd of that month his lordship proposed the counties to be divided so that each member should repre- second reading of his bill. Only ringleaders of the sent a separate division. With regard to burghs, it was conspiracy had been arrested. Of these 752 had been proposed to give one additional member to Glasgow; captured in all. When the raid upon,Chester Castle the city to be divided into north and south, the former had been attempted, signs of insurrection took place in to have one member, the latter to enjoy the privilege of Ireland, but the movement of bodies of troops, skilfully two members. The two groups of burghs, called the ordered by the commander-in-chief, suppressed these Kilmarnock and Falkirk districts, were to be dis- indications of revolt. Such was the main purport of the ! solved, regrouping them with other towns then unrepre- statement of the noble lord, upon which he grounded sented except through a county franchise: the prin- his proposal. To the surprise of the house Sir John | ciple of procedure being that every town in Scotland Gray seconded the motion. Sir John was a leader of having a population of not less than 6,000 should be a the extreme radical Irish section, and his support of the burgh, participating with other burghs in a united measure increased the moral influences of the governrepresentation. A new group called the Hamilton ment. Major Knox, a leader of the Conservative Irish union of burghs should have a member. Additions party, regretted that the proposed suspension was not were to be made to the Ayr burghs and the Haddington for twelve months. Mr. Bright, on behalf of the Liberal burghs. English members, repudiated the severity of Major Knox's purpose. This measure was severely criticised by the Scotch and some of the English members, as an attempt to strengthen the Conservative interest in the counties by withdrawing all towns having 6,000 persons from having a county franchise. Mr. Gladstone raised a startling point which drew the attention of the whole house. He complained that the right hon. gentleman opposite had not indicated whence the additional members were to be taken, as it was presumed that the number of the house, 658, was not to be increased. Mr. Gladstone recommended also that it would be better to fix the franchise at 47. The chancellor of the exchequer replied to these criticisms courteously and cleverly. He saw no reason to lower the property franchise in Scotland. He denied that he had any intention of increasing landlord power. He asserted that only eleven towns would be taken out of the Scotch counties by the arrangement for which he argued. With regard to the additional members he aimed no covert blow at Ireland, nor did he wish to abstract them from England. He saw no way clear but to increase the number of members in the house. Leave was given to bring in the bill, and it was read a second time, without debate, on the 22nd of July. The order for further proceeding with it was then discharged. A.D. 1867. IT The bill in its second reading passed the house. The standing orders were suspended in order to pass it the more rapidly through its remaining stages, and it was passed and sent up to the House of Lords with great haste. In the upper house Lord Derby, whose experience of the country as a popular Irish secretary and a good Irish landlord, was very great, took charge of the bill, and was supported by Earl Russell, Lord Kimberley, and other distinguished Whigs. The standing orders were suspended, and the bill passed with great rapidity through every stage, and the next day received the royal assent. After the expiration of the three months, to which the continuance of the suspension was limited, had occurred, the condition of Ireland was not more safe, and then (' Lord Naas had again to come down to the house with a proposal for its further continuance. He asked for its suspension until the 6th of March, 1868, justifying the opinions of Major Knox and his adherents, which Mr. Bright and his followers had so severely denounced. It appeared that the total number of arrests under the Act had been 961. Mr. Maguire, member for Cork City, denounced the government for being, by their spies and informers, in possession all along of the plans and purposes of the conspirators, and notwithstanding they allowed the plot to ripen when they might easily have arrested every ring. leader of the fraternity. Mr. Roebuck, member for Sheffield, spoke with a bitter animus against Ireland and the Irish, and alienated the Irish voters of his borough, who voted against him on the dissolution of parliament, and constituted one of the agencies of his signal defeat. In Ireland his speech produced intense exasperation, persons reading it aloud to crowds in the streets of the great cities and popular rural districts. Mr. Roebuck passed a high :| eulogy upon the Established Churches of England and Ireland, in opposition to the complaints of honourable gentlemen on his side of the house. Mr. Bright combated Mr. Roebuck's opinions, and delivered an eloquent invective against the Irish Church. Lord Naas in reply declared that nearly every steamer | from New York had for some time brought support of men, and money, and material, to effect an insurrection | in Ireland. Mr. Bernal Osborne represented the disaffection Ireland to be so formidable that at the first cannon shot hostile to England they would rise against the government. T was agreed on all hands that an Irish Reform Bill must be postponed. Other measures concerning the sister-country it was thought admitted of no delay, however reform might be delayed. The continued suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act was considered imperative. This was caused chiefly by the increase of Fenianism. The government had precise information, and indeed it was generally known to the house, that emissaries from the United States, particularly Irish officers who had served during the civil war there, were stirring up disaffection throughout Ireland. Accordingly, Lord Naas moved the second reading of a bill for continuing the suspension of the great constitutional privilege for three months. When the government had come into office there was 336 suspected | gress. Mr. Chichester Fortescue, who spoke with great authority, denounced the whole policy of the government. The bill passed the houses hurriedly, the standing orders in both cases being suspended to hasten its pro ין LAND TENURE. DEBATE ON THE IRISH CHURCH The Irish Church Establishment engaged the attention of both houses. Sir John Gray moved "That the house would resolve itself into committee on a future day to consider the temporalities and privileges of the Established Church of Ireland." Sir John did not add anything novel to the usual speeches on the Irish Church question. Colonel Greville seconded the resolution. He maintained that if the people of Ireland were treated as those of England and Scotland were, they would be even more loyal. Sir Frederick Heygate moved "the previous question." Very early in the session another measure for Ireland was introduced by the government-a bill to promote the improvement of land by tenants. The bill Lord Naas professed to found upon “the Lands Improvement Act." The following is an abstract sufficiently full of the noble lord's proposal. A commissioner of the board of works in Ireland would be appointed, with power to make rules, under which advances, to be submitted to parliament, would be made to tenants, who, if wishing to avail themselves of this Act, might apply to the commissioner, nearly in the same manner as the owners had done with regard to the advances sanctioned by parliament, of which nearly a million was yet to be advanced. There were six classes of improvements, for the making of which money was advanced under the Lands Improve- Mr. Gladstone made a remarkable speech against the ment Act. These were, thorough draining, the reclama-resolution, which was frequently quoted in other debates. tion of waste land and clearing it from rock and stones, He said he felt a difficulty in supporting the resolution, the removal of old and useless fences, the making of not because he questioned the soundness of the honourfences, the making of farm-roads, and the erection or able member's proposition, but because he thought they farmhouses, dwellings, and other buildings. With re- ought not to pass the resolution without being prepared gard to the first three of these improvements, the consent to give effect to it. It was with extreme reluctance that of the landlord would not be requisite; but if he dis- he had arrived at this conclusion, because, with the exsented from the last three they were not to be made. ception of some of the flowery epithets, he agreed with The loans, it was proposed, should be repayable in all that was said by the seconder of the motion. There thirty-five years, with interest, in half-yearly instal- were three grounds on which they might maintain a rements; but no advance was to be made unless it was ligious establishment. One was to maintain truth. But shown by the tenant that the improvements would in- it would be inconsistent to say that we supported the crease the value of the land more than the instalments Irish establishment to maintain truth, seeing that we to be paid. A discussion ensued, in which several mem- supported the College of Maynooth. The second ground hers took part, many of whom alleged that although the was, that the established religion was the religion of bill contained some good provisions, it would make the bulk of the people. But that was notoriously not the matters worse if it was to be treated as a permanent case in Ireland. A third ground was, that it was the settlement. religion of the poorest class of the community. But the Protestant Church in Ireland was the church of the rich. Neither Englishmen nor Scotchmen would tolerate being treated in this way. Let them apply to Irishmen the same measure by which they would themselves be meted. He trusted the time was not far distant when parliament would take the question up; and when it did, he was sanguine enough to entertain the hope that a result would be arrived at which would be a blessing to all. On the second reading the propriety and efficiency of the whole measure were very hotly discussed. Mr. Gregory moved that no measure could be effective for the settlement of the Irish land question that did not provide for the granting of leases to tenants. Mr. Bryan seconded the amendment. The O'Donoghue declared that the foundation of all the evils of Ireland was "the tenant-at-will" system, which existed for the purpose of enabling the landlords under cover of it to drive the tenants to the poll to vote against their conscience. Mr. Gregory's amendment met with powerful support and was lost by only a minority of four, although 212 members voted. The Irish conservative members objected to the tenants being allowed to make any improvement without the consent of the landlord. The bill from this cause, and the absorbing interest of the reform debates, made no further progress. In the House of Lords the Marquis of Clanricarde brought in a bill for giving facilities for voluntary contracts between landlords and tenants in Ireland. His lordship startled the house by declaring that there were in Ireland " tenants paying rent not only as high as 1,0007. a year, but 5,000l. and even 10,0007." Lord Malmesbury, then leading the upper house, gave his consent to a second reading, with the proviso that the bill should be sent to a select committee, with any measures concerning land in Ireland sent up from the other house. As all the noble lords knew well that no bills could pass the other house from the general character of the session, the apparent concession was only a manoeuvre to "shelve" Lord Clanricarde's proposal. Sir Colman O'Loghlen, later on in the session, brought in a bill to deal with "land tenure" in Ireland, his object being, he alleged, to encourage the granting of leases. Sir H. Bruce moved its rejection, in the usual constitutional form. The Conservative members for Ireland opposed Sir Colman's bill utterly, and the bill was withdrawn, its framer having no hope of success. VOL. IV. The Irish attorney-general surprised and amused the house by declaring that Mr. Gladstone's speech was communistic. The Irish secretary maintained that tithe was not a tax, but a second rent. It was, in his opinion, no oppression; and the people did not object to it. These opinions were met with shouts of derision by the Irish members occupying the opposition. Mr. Chichester Fortescue, afterwards destined to take an important part in Irish affairs, said the great object was to establish an ecclesiastical equality in Ireland. It would be a great misfortune if the question were treated on either side with ulterior political objects. He did not wish to secularise the church property in Ireland. He was not prepared to leave the Protestant Church in Ireland an unendowed church, and he thought that some of the revenues should be applied to the support of the Roman Catholic clergy in Ireland, without, however, subjecting them to the authority of the state. The Irish Roman Catholic members received this speech with enthusiasm. The motion was accepted by a small majority. In the House of Lords a similar debate was originated by Earl Russell, who moved an address to the Queen substantially in the spirit of Sir John Gray's resolution. The noble lord's speech was an echo of Mr. Fortescue's, and produced much excitement and an animated opposition. Lord Cairns offered the most effectual opposition. Lord Kimberley, in reply, insisted that if Lord Cairns' arguments were to prevail, no parliamentary interference with the Irish Church could ever take place. 3 D The Bishop of Ossory moved an addition to the resolution as follows-" and also as to the means by which they may be made best to promote the efficiency of the Established Church of Ireland." The Bishop of Down and Connor attracted much attention from both sides of the house by a remarkable speech. He said that one-fourth of the Protestants of Ireland were in his diocese. The plan he advocated was to take all the revenues of the Established Church and put them into one common fund, to be distributed through one board; he would give the landlords power to redeem the tithes on paying a certain number of years' purchase; he would sell the glebe-lands that were not wanted, and he would reduce the clergy from two archbisops, ten bishops, and 3,600 clergy, to one archbishop, six bishops, and 2,000 clergy. He added, that in his experience the Roman Catholic population did not look with ill-will upon the parochial clergy. A division was taken on the question of the Bishop of Ossory's amendment, which was rejected by 90 to 30. An address praying for a royal commission of inquiry was agreed to. In consequence of this address a commission was issued by the crown in the autumn. DEBATE ON THE STATE OF IRELAND. Shortly before the termination of the session Sir Colman O'Loghlen called the attention of the commons to the state of Ireland, and to the fact that the government had attempted no useful legislation for that unfortunate country. THE BUDGET. On the 4th of April the chancellor of the exchequer made his financial statement. The speech of Mr. Disraeli had nothing of the ornate and ambitious style characteristic of his eloquence. His task was comparatively easy, so far at all events as the parliamentary statement was concerned. Out of doors there was no agitation against particular taxes, although some discussions and some desire for alterations existed. The surplus of income over expenditure for the year was considerable, and the chief question with the finance minister and the house was how to deal with it. Entering at once into figures, without any further preface than to remind the house of the extreme financial peril through which we had passed since Mr. Gladstone made his calculations, Mr. Disraeli stated that, notwithstanding this financial pressure, the actual income of 1866-67 exceeded the estimate by 2,421,000l., being 69,434,0007., as against 67,013,000%; and this surplus, he explained, chiefly arose from the customs and excise, each item having produced considerably over one million more than Mr. Gladstone's estimate. The expenditure of the year was estimated at 67,031,000l., but the actual issues from the exchequer were only 66,780,0007., showing a saving of 251,000, which, taken with the excess of revenue, showed a balanced surplus of 2,654,1727. In the same way the balances in the exchequer, which on the 31st of March, 1866, were 5,851,3147., rose on the 31st of March, 1867, to 7,294,0007.; and the "dead weight" annuity also, amounting to 585,740., would fall in on the following day (April 5th), though it would be necessary to provide 284,0007. on account of it in the year's estimates. Passing to the finance of the year, Mr. Disraeli stated the estimated expenditure of the year thus: Interest on Debt.. Other Consolidated Fund Charges.. Total. £26,000,000 1,900,000 15.253,000 10.926,000 8.203,000 5,143,000 709,000 £68,134,000 And these would be defrayed by an estimated revenue of 69,340,0007., thus produced: Customs Assessed Taxes £22,000,000 20,700,000 9.550,000 3,500,000 6,000,000 4,650,000 340,000 2,600,000 £69,340,000 The chancellor of the exchequer replied, after a desultory debate, and his speech was important and remarkable. He agreed that the state of that country was unsatisfactory, but that was not the fault of the present government or of their predecessors. He was glad to say that emigration was diminishing. Emigration had been attributed to the state of the land question, and to the absence of tenant-right, a right which prevailed in Ulster; but when he found the emigration from Ulster to be as great as from any other part of Ireland he was perplexed. Government had introduced a measure to amend the law of landlord and tenant; but it was received with hostile criticism, and they were told that compensation was all moonshine. With regard to the question of education, he admitted that it ought to be settled; but it was a question of great difficulty, and must be met by a combination, he would not say on one side or both sides, but of all parties in the house. With regard to the Irish Church, he thought that those who spoke of it as only a badge of conquest were indulging a feeling which would not conduce to the interest of that country. He was not for destroying that institution; and he put it to those who said that Showing a surplus of revenue over expenditure of absenteeism was one of the great evils of Ireland, whether 1,206,0007. At this stage, Mr. Disraeli remarked, comit was wise to drive from Ireland the Protestant clergy-menced the chief difficulty of a chancellor of the exmen, who lived there in some degree of opulence. Then, referring to the extract from his speech of 1844, which had been quoted by Sir Colman O'Loghlen, in which he spoke of the Irish Church as an alien church, he described it as "a rhetorical passage," and said the circumstances of Ireland had changed. At that time the population was eight millions; it was now five millions and a half. Ireland must be dealt with now in accordance with her altered circumstances. He trusted that by the improvement of her agriculture, by the promotion of manufactures, and by a combination of various industries, the condition of Ireland would soon be greatly improved. Several Irish members, among whom were Mr. Pim, Mr. Monsell, and Mr. O'Beirne, then addressed the house, and dilated on the grievances of Ireland, predicting that the refusal of the government to deal with the Established Church and with the land question would greatly increase the prevailing discontent in that country, Total........... chequer in framing his budget-the disposal of the surplus; and he prefaced his announcements on this point by reminding the house that during the last ten years there had been reductions of taxation, irrespective of the income tax, to the amount of 11,000,000l. a year, consequently it was difficult to fix upon any tax so ex tremely severe and unjust that all sides would unite in calling for its removal. Except the malt tax, there was no duty which injuriously affected the industry of any large portion of the people; but as this tax could only be dealt with on a large and comprehensive scale, the resources he had at his disposal this year would not || enable him to touch it, anxious though he might be to do so. Next to the appropriation of the surplus to the diminution of taxes came its application to the reduction of debt, and the only way of doing this was by charging some specific annual amount on the consolidated fund. After discussing how this method could be best applic such as by an annual vote in the financial statement, or by a sinking fund (which he strongly condemned) he expressed his preference for the plan proposed by Mr. | would in due time give each their turn for consideration. Gladstone last year, abandoning the more complicated There was one portion of the financial statement which and too far-reaching part of it. Last year Mr. Gladstone he could not contemplate with satisfaction, and that had proposed and carried a measure for cancelling was the increase in the estimates over those of last 5,000,0007. of debt due to the post office and old savings- year, which amounted to no less a sum for the supply banks by a terminable annuity, half of which sum had services alone, than 2,290,000. But he was aware that already been operated on and the other half would be they were affected by peculiar circumstances this year, cancelled immediately, provision for the purpose being and could not be attacked without provoking a serious taken in this year's budget; and he also proposed to issue with the government. Considering the important cancel a sum of 24,000,0007. by an annuity terminating political matters now pending, he should be most unwilin 1885, and a further sum by a second operation ling to embarrass them in any way. Neither would he extending to 1905. Approving this plan, or at least the quarrel with the very simple proposal for dealing with first part of it, Mr. Disraeli proposed to devote a portion marine insurances, but he trusted that the house would of the surplus to the cancelling of 24,000,0007. of debt, not sanction any proposal for further reducing the and he thus explained the particulars of the operation:- surplus of the chancellor of the exchequer. The right It would be effected on two sums of the public debt, one hon. gentleman then proceeded at some length to conof 18,000,0007., the other of 6,000,000. The first amount, sider the scheme for the reduction of the national debt; now bearing interest to the amount of 540,000l., would upon the necessity of which he argued with great force, be converted into an annuity of 1,332,0007., terminating highly eulogising the efforts made by the United States on July 5, 1885, and the second sum, now bearing for this object, which they felt to be essential to their 180,000l. a year interest, would be converted into an future power. He sincerely trusted that their conduct annuity of 444,000l., terminating on April 5, 1885, the would shame the nations of Europe into following their joint amount of the two annuities being 1,776,0007. The patriotic example. He approved of the scheme of the charge on this year's revenue from this operation would government, observing that it would have been a derebe three quarters' interest on the 18,000,000/., and one liction of duty not to have made some proposal of the quarter's interest on the 6,000,0007., amounting to kind, when a considerable sum was falling in, and the 1,110,000%; but to this must be added the interest on chancellor of the exchequer deserved credit for resisting the two sums until they were converted (360,0007.), and the temptation of gaining a temporary popularity by from it must be deducted the interest we should have to proposing this instead of a reduction of taxation. pay if they were not converted (720,0007.), by which the The most notable points in the discussion which foltotal charge on the year 1867-8 from the conversion lowed Mr. Gladstone's speech, which produced great would be reduced to 750,000. Mr. Disraeli next de-effect upon the house, were as follows:-The question scribed how the conversion would affect the revenue of future years from 1868 to 1885. Its total annual cost would be 1,776,0007., from which must be deducted the annual interest paid on the debt in its present form (720,0007.); and, taking into account the total removal of the dead weight next year, the operation might be described as the complete cancelling of 24,000,000%. at a cost of something under half a million a year until 1885. This would reduce the present surplus to 456,000l., and 210,000%. of this he proposed to devote to the reduction of the marine insurance duties, whether on time or voyage policies, to a uniform rate of 3d. per cent., except in the case of time policies exceeding six months, which would be fixed at 6d. per cent. The result of these two operations would be to leave a surplus in hand of 246,000, which he did not propose further to trench upon; and, after speaking less than an hour, Mr. Disraeli concluded, amid expressions of general approbation, by moving a resolution for the renewal of the income tax, which was that day to expire. was raised and ably debated, whether it was the wiser course to reduce the debt, or reduce taxation. The chancellor of the exchequer and the ex-chancellor of the exchequer, were in favour of attending to both in their measure, but were very decidedly in favour of reducing the debt. Many other members took the converse of this. The two leaders of the house and their supporters on this question had much the best of the argument. Their critics could not see that by every million the debt was reduced, the interest upon the debt was lessened, and taxes in such case less necessary to be levied. Other important discussions were raised, as particular votes on the budget drew them forth. The plan of terminable annuities was much extolled by the house. The income tax was reimposed without a murmur. When, however, "the National Debt Bill" was brought in, for the purpose of carrying into effect the extinction of a portion of the debt by the application of a surplus revenue, it was not read a second time without indirect opposition. Mr. H. B. Sheridan moved as Mr. Hubbard gave notice that he should move a reso- an amendment that a further reduction of the duty on lution to defer any reduction of debt so long as the fire-fire assurances would be a better disposal of the surplus insurance duties were unrepealed. A desultory discussion then took place. He, however, gave a warm approval to the project of reducing the duties on marine insurance. Mr. Gladstone made the speech of the evening; it was very important. He said that the statement of the Chancellor of the exchequer was so lucid and simple, that he was tempted out of the usual course to at once express his opinion on its proposals, instead of waiting for a later opportunity. Considering the severe financial crisis to which the country had been subjected during the past year—which it might have been supposed would have seriously affected the consuming powers of the country-the great increase in the customs and the excise was at once most extraordinary and most gratifyng. On these points he could have wished to have had Some further information, and he would also like to know what had been the effect of the reduction on the fire-insurance duty. There were, no doubt, many taxes which hon. members would prefer to have reduced, but ms it was impossible to satisfy all their demands at once, he could only hope that the elasticity of the revenue revenue for the then present year than the creation of terminable annuities proposed by the bill. Mr. Sheridan maintained that the taxation of fire assurance was not only impolitic but unjust. Mr. Hubbard seconded Mr. Sheridan's amendment. Mr. Cave had the temerity to introduce into the debate a whimsical proposal for a tax upon coal, to pay off the national debt-the honourable gentleman forgetting that this would be a tax on mining, and a tax on consumers, which would fall very heavily on the poor in the winter months, and raise much public clamour. Mr. Gorst brought down upon himself the loudly expressed indignation of the house by the allegation that the scheme which the bill was intended to make effective was a sham bargain between two officers of the chancellor of the exchequer's department. The honourable gentleman was understood as meaning a sham bargain between the two right hon. gentlemen, the leaders of the opposite sides of the house. Mr. Gladstone once more addressed the house effectively. He argued for the reduction of the duty on |