I ^tyerita .ndinutt"t.|1864-07-02|The North Wales Chronicle and Advertiser for the Principality - Welsh Newspapers Online
Hide Articles List

15 articles on this Page









I ^tyerita .ndinutt"t.


^tyerita .ndinutt"t. HOUSE OF l,ie present position Earl ST^HOPE c.lIIed attention to commi. of the Royal Academy. He stated that ». -onths, sion inquired into the question for several w. and arrived unanimously at their report, but thd 11. vernment had as yet given no intimation of their izitm. tion with respect to the recommendations of the com- missioners. He begged to ask what atop they intended to take. Lord ST. LEONARDS condemned the recommendation of the commissioner#/ which would destroy, and not re- model, the Royal Academy. He trusted the Govern- ment would deallibemlly with it as regard the question of the site. After some remarks from Lord Houghton, the Duke of Rutland, Lord Hardinge, and Lord Overstone, Earl GRANVILLE said it waeimpossiMeDot to fed that the Academy, consisting of the most able artists of the country, enjoyed a position of great public importance. It was this feeling which induced the Government to appoint a royal commission, which had made a most able report. That report was referred to the Royal Academy, which had in reply presented an address, as to its righto, to her Majesty, who, however, declined to reply to it personally, and had left the question to the consideration of the Government. With respect to the' tirst question of the noble earl, the House of Commons rejected the proposal to leave the Rfjy,,31 Academy in Trafalgar Square, with enlarged space, atHl to that deci- sion the Government would bow. As regards the second qu, .;i"II, the Government had not time to ool1.ider these detail. and he could not give a pledge as to any parti- cular cause. 1 he subject then dropped. Lord RAVENSWORTU asked somequestions with respect to the operation of the recent Act for preventing noxious vapours from chemical works His experience was that it was already a dead letter. Lord STANLUY, of Alderley, said the Act onW came into operation on tue 1st of Jaiiiiary last, and as yet they had not received the reports of the inspectors, but he was hu'onued that the results were uiotit satisfac- tory. The Earl of DImBY hoped the Act would be ex- tended. The other Bilk on the paper wcre advanced a stage, and their Lordships adjourned at half past seven. I. ————— HOUSE OF COMMONS- FRIDAY. In reply to Mr. Corry, LorJ C. FA(JKT HAITI the Admiralty did not think it I nect'Mary to scud an onicer to Cherbourg to examine and report );i the mode adopted to strengthen the sides of the Federal corvette ICearsarge inorderto resist the effects of shell. That information was obtained when the vessel was in dock in this country. In reply to Mr. Crawford, Lord (,. I'A(;I;T &ti(i the privilege of hoisting the blue ensign would be conceded to merchant vessels comman- ded and partly manned by oiffcers anil men of the naval reserve. Iii ftititic tliei-e %v,)iil(i (,tilv be three eii,igiis-- the white of the royal navy, the blue for the naval re- serve, aud the red tor tlie merchant service. On the motion for going int., Committee of Supply, Mr. MORHITT rose to move a resolution to the effect that in the event of their being any modification of the indirect taxation of the country, the excise duty on uftilt ought to receive the iirst consideration. He expressed a hope that the question would not be regarded as of a party charaeter, and rested his case on the simple jus- tice of the proposition. No one could deny that in one respect the tax stood alone, for of late years important modifications had been made in every other branch of the revenue but the malt tax. It had this peculiarity also, that it was the only tax levied on the producers and the products of English soil, and it hung like a mill- stoue around the necks of the farmers. He argued that the agricultural interest was entitled to some share of the disposal of the surplus revenue of the country. This tax checked their industry, and prevented the cultiva- tion of the land to the best possible advantage. It was an incontroveitible fact that every one who drank beer contributed largely to the duty, and it was therefore most oppressive to the labouring classes, to whom malt liquor was not a luxury, but a necessary of life. Mr. Hennessy seconded the motion. The CHANCELLOR of the ExciiEtjuiiR said he would not ask the House to meet the proposition of the hon. member with a direct negative, but he trusted they would agree to go at once into Committee of Supply, which would have practically the same effect as if he had moved the previous question. He urged this course on the House more espqpially because it was most nn. wise and unexpedient to pledge the House by anticipa- tion to deal with the revenue. As regarded the motiou itself, it was in the abstract not only admissible but ab- solutely incontrovertible but it assumed a new charac- ter when, under peculiar circumstances, it was submitted as the practical expression of the opinion of a legislature, that was to stand recorded on ita journals. If the mo- tion was carried, and the House at some future time proceeded to fulfil its pledge, the least reduction that would give any sensible relief to the producer and to the consumer, would be one half. The hon. member, he believed, would he content with one third. But to allow even that relief, £ 2,000,000 sterling must be raised from other sources of revenue more oppressive to the landed interest. But besides this, the restraints of the excise would still remain as oppressive as ever, and he could not conceive tlmt a reduction even of one half would benefit the consumer, although it would entail a considerable sacrifice of revenue. He also pointed out that the reduction of the malt duty would affect the duty on spirits, and contended that it would be unfair to Scotland and Ireland. In both those countries whisky was the national beverage-in England malt liquor- but the two former countries already paid, in the shape of the spirit duty, a great impost on the national drink than England did on its drink, in the shape of the malt duty, lie reiterated his hope that the House would not pledge itself tc any course, which, in future, could not fail to be a source of much incon- venience. Lord J. MANNERS, in supporting the motion, warmly condemned the maintenance of a tax which was unjust in principle, unequal in its operation, and productive of the worst social consequences, by encouraging intein- perance among the lower orders. Mr. UR(JUHART expressed a hope that the day was not far distant when the Government could reduce the tax, if it were only out of regard for the public health. By so doing, they would render adulteration no longer profitable. Mr. NEATE contended that the owners and occupiers of land, by reason of the immunities which they enjoyed, and comparative lightness of the burdens to which they were subjected were not entitled to any pri- ority of consideration on a review of the taxation of the country. Mr. NEWDEGATK supported the motio.1, whfth, on a division, was negatived by a majority of 166 to 118. In reply to Mr. Maguire, The ATTORNBY-GENERAL for Ireland Baid a bill was in preparation for reforming and regulating the Irish Court of Admiralty. The House then went into Committee of Supply pro forma, but immediately resumed. The Inland Revenue (Stamp Duties) Bill and the Chimney Sweepers Regulation Bill passed through Com- mittee. The Weighing of Grain (Port of London) Bill was referred to a select committee. On the order for going into Committee upon this Bill, Mr. LONGFIKLD moved that the bill be referred to a select committee. In showing how the bill originated, he gave a long and amusing history of the attempts at Irish Chancery reform; and he undertook to predict that three of the members of the last Royal Commission would be provided for under the bill, which, instead of diminishing, would, he said, increase cost and ex- penditure. Col. Dunne seconded this amendment. Mr. HUNT suggested that the bill had better be with. drawn. Mr. O'HACMN reminded the House of the position in which he stood in reference to this bill. If, after the adoption of the principle of the bill-wliicli, he repeated, would reduce expense—the House thought fit to reject the measure, he should not be responsible and could not hell) it, Mr. WHITESIDE said it would be much wiser, in his opinion, to postpone this measure till next session, and in the meantime to submit it to the Master of the Rolls in Ireland and a Judge of the Landed Estates Court. Mr. Longfield having withdrawn his amendment, Mr. WHITESIDE moved to defer the committee for three months. Upon a division, Mr. Whiteside's amendment was nega- tived by 51 to 49. Mr. VANCE thought that, considering the narrow majority, another opportunity should be given to the House to determine whether it should go iuto a com- mittee upon the bill. He moved that the debate be adjourned. After a short discussion, upon a division, this motion Wa" negatived by 56 to 51. Mr. COLLINS moved that the House do adjourn. The discussion wa renewed, and ultimately the motion for adjournment was negatived hy 56 to 63. The adjournment of the debate was then moved by Mr. Lygol. Lord PALMERSTOX assented, and the debate was ac- cordingly adjourned. The other orders of the day were then proceeded with, and the House adjourned at one o'clock.

[No title]