On this page
-
Text (1)
-
724 THE LEADER. [Sa**tiue>a¥, - : .; ' '...
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.
The Week In Parliament. The India Bill. ...
after four years would pay no more . Here was the case of hardship and oppression which had been so feelingly described . He ridiculed the bugbear about inspecting title deeds , hoped their lordships would not hesitate about going into committee on a bill in unison with the principles of justice , and which had been received by the other House , and by the country , with so much approbation . ¦ The Earl of "Winchilsea , had he been present at the moving the second reading , would have divided
against it , had he stood alone ; and he described the bill as fraught with injustice , litigation , oppression , and cruelty . From the time when the " proud barons" of England had resisted unjust taxation , there had been no such imposition ; and " we live in fearful times if the proud barons of England , no longer worthy of their ancestry , submit to bills like this . " They had fallen into the hands of harpies . No amendment could ever reconcile him to the principle of this odious and infamous bill .
Their lordships then went into committee on clause 2 . The Earl of Derby , in moving his first amendment , explained that , though aware of the difficulty existing in the way of their lordships' interference with a money bill , nevertheless there were precedents showing that such difficult" might be got over . That House had upon a former occasion sent down to the other House amendments on a money bill , which the Commons , of course , refused to accept j but , suspending their stands ing orders , introduced another bill totidem verhis with those of the bill from the Lords . He could not
consent that the Lords should merely register the money bills of the Commons . He refused to believe that the measure was popular on account of its being an attack upon large landed properties ; but he believed that the pressure and the hardship of the bill would fall upon holders of small properties , especially in regard to the legal expenses which would be occasioned , and which would be as vexatious as the tax-itself . He then described the second principle stated by the Lord Chancellor as new and unjust , but he urged that if settled and unsettled property ,
and real and personal estate , -were to be placed on an equal footing , at all events the law ought not to be retrospective . To make it so was actually to make a new will for a deceased testator , a course which , even in the case of vested interests in abuses , the Legislature had carefully avoided . But here there was no abuse , but merely a revenue deficiency to be patched up by ex post facto legislation . The clauses to which his objections principally applied were clauses 2 , 3 , 5 , 15 , and 34 . He moved , in the first place , an amendment in clause 2 , for the purpose of destroying its retrospective
character . The Earl of Abbbdeek commented upon the course adopted by Lord Derby , in refusing to vote for the rejection of a Bill which he had called the corner-stone of the Government policy , and in proceeding to introduce amendments calculated to destroy its character . Lord Derby professed much regard for small proprietors , but know perfectly well that settlements were almost exclusively adopted by tho owners of large properties .
Ho stated that in nino cases out of ton the wills of persons in the middle class of life wero bo made as to subject tho property to tho incidenco of tho legacy duty . Therefore tho porsons for whom tho noblo earl proiossed euch tenderness wore , in point of fact , liablo to the legacy duty , in consequence of tho disposition they had made of their property , in nino cases out of ten . It was , therefore , true , as tho noblo earl ( the Earl of Winchelsoa ) who had spokon early in tho debate said , a matter which particularly affected the interests of " tho bold barons , " and , to do them
justice , they seornod disposed to act upon tho principles which actuated tho barons of old in tho preservation of their own feudal exemption from the burdens borne b y the rest of their fellow-countrymen . It is tho object or this bill to br ing these hold barons undor the flame law which is applicable to the rest of tho community ; and it is in that way alone that tho tax can bo said to bo popular . No tax could ho popular in itself , but n sense of justioo mig-ht render its principles popular when it wna booh to bo equally implied .
His short answer to Lord Dorby was , thut his amendment would overthrow tho whole structure of tho tax , by postponing its operation . Nothing like this course had beon taken since tho othor Houso had as-Bortcd its exclusive right of dealing with money billet . Ho denied tho justice of Lord-Derby's objection to tho measure , und in reference to tho remark that tho Government hml created tho neconnity for tho tax , demanded why , if it had beon thought ho oppressive , had Lord Derby permitted tho remission of tho dution which supplied its place P Probably Lord Dorby had thought it would bo n lent popular course to opposo tho repeal of tho former duty than tho Imposition of n now one . In answer to u remnik of Lord Aberdeen ' s , that tho Into Government had contemplated some such tax , Lord Djcrbx struck in , und denied that any irocU echemo had
ever been mooted in his Cabinet , or in any way come under the consideration of the late Government . The Earl of Aberdeen read ^ extracts from a speech of Mr . Disraeli ' s io prove that the subject had avowedly been considered , and then proceeded to controvert the " extravagant" statements of Lord Derby as to the operation , of this tax on Scotch entails . He then remarked that this amendment was designed to do in committee what , for reasons best known to themselves , noble lords opposite had not chosen to do on the second reading , and , so regarding it , he opposed it .
The Earl of Habdwicxe supported the amendment , and ( having apparently not heard Lord Winchilsea ' s speech ) was especially indignant with Lord Aberdeen for his " sneer" at the " bold barons "—" dangerous words , and not likely to be forgotten /* Earl GbanvUjXE , the Duke of AbgyiIi , and the Marquis of Lansdowne , defended the bill , and argued that it would strengthen the landed interest , by placing them on a footing with their fellow-subjects . The committee divided , and the numbers Were —> For the amendment . ¦ ¦ * . . . 68 Against it . . . . * . . / . . 102 Majority for Government . . ——34 The clause , and the remaining clauses , were agreed to ; and the House adjourned .
The third reading took place on Thursday night . Lord St . Leonabds moved several amendments , by way of recording points of protest against the Bill . They were negatived , without a division , and the Bill passed .
THE CONVERSION SCHEME . A debate on Mr . Gladstone's plan for the conversion of the South Sea , and other stocks , commenced on Thursday evening . Mr . Gi-adstoke formally moved three resolutions : the first of which was to provide out of the Consolidated Fund for paying off such holders of South Sea Annuities , Bank Annuities of 1726 , and Three per Cent . Annuities of 1751 , as should not have signified their willingness- to commute under the Act of the present session , c . 23 . The second was to enable the South Sea Company to commute certain shares standing in the names of the Chancery and Bankruptcy officials and others , and to convert them into other stock under the said Act . And the third resolution
was to enable the South Sea Company to commute any part of the annuity or interest payable in respect of such further amount of their capital as might be authorized by Parliament to be invested as a guarantee fund for the administration of private trusts , should Parliament authorize them to undertake such administration . Mr . Gladstone briefly explained the meaning of the resolution . The first authorizes Government to pay off those who have not accepted the commutation offered to them . The second extends the time for
option of commutations as regards that portion of South Sea Stock held by the Accountant-General in Chancery and Bankruptcy , or by joint trustees who have not had tho option of such commutation , owing to having no right to vote on the question of option decided by the other holders . And as the South Sea Company are about to become trustees for private parties , it ia better that they should be allowed thus to re-invest this money than to have two millions and a-half thrown on the money market in January next . As it is uncertain at what time the new commutations may take place , the terms are to bo arranged by the Government itself .
Mr . Disbaem , having objected that tho new resolutions camo by surprise on tho committee , proceeded to criticise the Government plan . He refused to give the Govornmont leave to proceed with an experiment that had been a complete failure : nor was there a chance of this additional proposition being moro successful . Mr . Gladstone has introduced a novel element into consideration . First , ho has extended tho area of commutation b y introducing now stock , and tbon he has done that which tho committee should ponder well before sanctioning—ho has proposed that power should bo erantod to
the Government , which is very unusual if not unprecedented , of concluding at their own discretion tho terms on which the financial oporation should tako place . If tho proposition of tho Govornmont on this subject had been successful—if they had shown such an acquaintance with the money market , and ouch a mastery of tho phenomena with which they had to deal , that they had a right to appeal to tho confidence of tho ICouse , as a matter ofprinoiplo wo still should hesitate to confide to any Govornmont sq groat a degree of power , the possession of which is not at
all necessary . But I have a right to consider whether tho antecedents of tho Government are such as to entitle them to tho conGdoneo which they claimed . Mr . Gladstone or Iuh colleagues cannot profur any claim for thiB unusual confidence on tho Hcoro of the auccosa of their financial oporation . The manner in which ' they formod their judgment on this important subject of a commutation of tho publio funds is not ono which they ean look back to thernnolvos with unlimited or unalloyed natisfaotion or ( iolf-gratulution . The projoct , when first brought before the ICouse , was of vory largo dimensions , Before ftny diaouinion could tako plaoo upon it , it was greatly altered dud modified . Tho limitations wliiou wore proposed to tho
various kinds of stock bf ought under consideration varied from day to day . The subject , the question , the measure were hurried through the House , because , they were toy ' such was the eagerness to accept the commutation that the House must waive their right of criticism . ( The Chancel lor of the Exchequer made a gesture of dissent . ) I appejj to the House whether that waft not the conclusion to be arrived at , and I confess I am rather surprised at the ia . terruption of the right , honourable gentleman , when to recalled to the House the fact that no discussion upon that importa nt measure , ever took place on those occasions on which discussions usua lly occurred , namely , on the second
and third readings of the Bill . When the right honour able gentleman interrupted me I was pressing on the com . mittee two points— -first , that it ia most unwise to extend to any Minister the power of entering at his discretion into bargains of this kind ; and , secondly , I think I am only fulfilling my duty in reminding the committee—I trust not in language which is offensive— -that the antecedents of the Government are not such as should make their case an exception to the rule which I have ventured to impress upon their attention . I think we ought to resitf the granting of such a discretionary power to any Government . And why is it to be granted P The right honourable gentleman made a proposition of financial commuta . tion , and brought in a measure which has not sucoeedei It awoears to me the wisest course would be to conelud *
and close that business as soon as possible . These pertom must be paid , and must be paid in money . Lefe the House know the cost of the transaction , let them see tha ^ instead of a very moderate saving of 25 , < XXM . a year , there will be a certain loss . Xet them know what that loss wfll be , and then we shall be better acquainted with the state of the public finances . But because the Government hu brought forward and carried a measure which has turned out , as they were warned it wotild , perfectly illusory and inefficient , it appears to me most unwise at the end of the session to be patching up that scheme , « mterine intonet speculations , founded on the same erroneous ana imperfect data , and asking the House to grant a power to the Ad . ministration which must leave the publio . finances , when Parliament was prorogued , in aatateof uncertainty and doubt . "
The first resolution was agreed to , and discussion on the second ensued , and continued , until four o ' clock interrupted the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the com meucement of a reply . In the House of Commons , in a morning sitting yes terday , which was occupied in unusually important business , Mr . Gladstone delivered himself of an elaborate answer to the criticisms spoken the previous day by Mr . Disraeli and Sir F . Kelly , upon his scheme for the conversion of stock . In the first place he denied in toto the assertions of those gentlemen that in his new set of resolutions he was proposing to offer to
the holders of South Sea Stock any better terms than he proferred under the original plan , and which they had declined ; and he further denied that he was now contemplating the giving himself any advantage by securing an unlimited period for carrying out the negotiations . He stated that he simply proposed to empower the Treasury to offer to those holders of South Sea Stock who were disqualified by the existing law from accepting the option held out to other holders , the same identical terms which those persons had so far thought right to decline . He confessed that he was disappointed in his scheme ; he had not calculated on so small an amount of stock being commuted ;
but he accounted for the partial failnre in various ways—to tho delay which had occurred in passing the plan through the House ; and to the political difl * turbances , occasioning financial suspense in Europe To a great extent ho contended that he had succeeded Several small stocks had been commuted to the advantage of tho Exchequer , and had laid the foundation of a financial operation , which was only commencing , so that decisive criticism was inappropriate , likely to bo both profitable and convenient . These are tho points of an eluborato statement , of a defensive character , which was warmly received , and made a distinctly favourable personal impression .
Sir F . Kkm , y continued tho discussion by proposing a clause restraining trustees from converting trust property without tho concurrence of those who wero beneficially interested . His object was to remedy W ovil already committed , and to proveut its increase After various opinions hud been offered , Mr , J . B . Smith : and Sir H . Wimdouohby opposed the new course proposed to bo taken to " bolster" l » i » failure , by Mr . Gludstono . Mr . Gjwn defended tho scheme in its entirety , and acquitted Mr . Gladstone of " failure . "
Mr . Diskabm ( niW much incidental diflcusflion ha " taken plnco ) briefly replied to Mr . Gladstone , «*& protested ngiiinst the explanation— " European disturbances "—of tho " fnilurc , " which ho said had beon fully predicted by himfiolf and others long before theao disturbances had beon threatened ; and ho attributed the failure prcciBoly to those circumstances which ho l « w wtatcd « t the outset . Tho second resolution Avns carried—testing the »» ° * cess of Mr . Gludatono ' B defence—by 117 t *> C 7-Tho furthor proceeding in , tbo matter , after tbw « P waa odjournod to Monday .
724 The Leader. [Sa**Tiue>A¥, - : .; ' '...
724 THE LEADER . [ Sa ** tiue > a ¥ , - : . ; ' ' - ¦ ' ' ¦ ¦ , ¦ ¦ v ¦ . —^ - »»^» r ? i « LM 1 i . jijtii >' . uiw . ' ui : wi !» : «^^^^
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), July 30, 1853, page 4, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_30071853/page/4/
-