disrepute among the nations of Europe, and the danger which it was said to have inspired was now on the other side. The danger which now existed was not a danger to be apprehended from the people it was a danger that arose out of the doctrine of legitimate governments, to be maintained and supported by military force-it was a danger that the governments would go too far in trampling on the rights and liberties of their subjects. And yet this was the time in which the ministers of the Crown thought proper to desire so considerable an increase of the standing army, compared with what it was in the year 1792. It was admitted, that Ireland was the most disturbed part of our dominions, and that England was the most tranquil; but, in framing the estimates, this view of the empire was entirely overlooked, and the increase of the army in England was much greater than the augmentation which ministers had made for the sister country. If they wished to remove the discontent which unfortunately existed in that part of the empire; if they were desirous of governing Ireland, not by the sword, but by the laws; they would turn their attention to those subjects which formed the principal grounds of murmur. The noble lord and his colleagues would readily understand that he alluded to the Catholic claims; which, if granted, would have the effect of restoring tranquillity in every part of the kingdom. It was scarcely necessary, at that time of day, to observe, that standing armies were utterly inconsistent with the spirit of our free constitution; but he would venture to say, that it was one of the most calamitous signs of the times, that, in every country, armies were kept up for the purpose of spoliation, and of exciting terror in the minds of the people. If any change in the affairs of the world had rendered it necessary for England to deviate from her ancient policy with respect to a standing army, that change took place previous to 1792; and, therefore, he again placed his foot on that year, as the standard which ought to govern our proceedings, and he called on the noble ford to show what there was in the state of Europe which could warrant him to propose the present enormous establishment. He was persuaded that it was quite preposterous and unnecessary; and he lamented that so little attention had been paid to the discussion of the estimates this year. He would freely admit, and he t regretted to be forced to observe, that the little attention which had been devoted to them, did as little credit to those who sat on his side of the House as to those who sat on the other; but he hoped it might arise from some accidental circumstance. Having stated thus much, he should merely add that he felt it his duty to oppose so large a standing army, and most heartily approved of the amendment. Lord Castlereagh could not allow the question to go to a division without saying a few words. It was not from not feeling the great importance of the question that he had not sooner offered himself to the attention of the House, but because he had heard nothing urged in the course of the debate which was an argument against the proposed establishment; and he referred to the thinness of the House on the present occasion as evincing a feeling, that after the previous discussions, the opinions of members were settled as to the necessity of the amount of force proposed. The hon. and learned gentleman wished to take the year 1792 as the standard, according to which the estimates of the present year should be regulated. Now, with respect to the establishment of 1792, he begged the House to recollect that Mr. Pitt, in that year, when he proposed the estimates, stated, that he had framed them on the prospect of a long period of profound peace. In this it unhappily proved that Mr. Pitt was mistaken, for the war broke out the very next year; and the consequence of the lowness of the establishment in the year 1792 was, that this country suffered very much from an extreme degree of military feebleness during the first years of the war. The hon. and learned baronet thought that we could do at present with a force of 10,000 men less than that in the estimates, but then he forgot to state the particular quarter in which the reduction was to be made. Was it seriously said, that any reduction could be made in the 26,000 men to be kept up for the home service? In which part of the home establishment would the hon. and learned baronet make his reduction? Not less than 11,000 men were required for the service of the metropolis and the dockyards; and could 16.000 be thought sufficient for that of all England? He assured the House that ministers intended to make every possible reduction which would not be inconsistent with the interests and safety of the country. Mr. Bankes thought that the present vote was larger than the necessity of the case required. Last year, from the agitated state of the country, he had not thought any reduction could safely be made in the force proposed for England; but now that order and tranquillity once more prevailed, he was of a different opinion. As to the army in Ireland, he wished it to be reduced gradually. The question being put, that " 113,640 men" stand part of the question, the House divided: Ayes, 51; Noes, 21. List of the Minority. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Wednesday, March 4. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY-MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES.] The House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply to which the Miscellaneous Estimates were referred. On the resolution, "That 60,000. be granted towards defraying the expense of the building of a Penitentiary House at Millbank, for the year 1818," Mr. Gordon said, that the House ought to be made acquainted with the way in which the sums before granted for the building of this establishment had been spent. It had been found necessary to take down some of the towers, they had been so badly constructed. The sum now required was for rebuilding. Mr. Lockhart said, no less than 71,000l. above the sum at which the expense of this prison was originally estimated, had already been voted; and as a prison it had totally failed to produce the effect which the House had in view, namely, to deter from the commission of crime. It might indeed have produced, what, compared with the other, was a secondary object, the amendment of the criminal. But that was of small importance, compared with the deterring from the commission of crime. It might be Christian-like to endeavour to better these people, and to (VOL. XXXVII.) send them into the world in a more comfortable condition than they were in before. The world, however, could dispense with them; for he believed the chasm in society, occasioned by the removal of culprits, could always be soon filled up. Notwithstanding the sums expended by the country in prisons and establishments of various descriptions, they found that crimes were perpetually increasing. There were other means to which they ought to turn their attention. A vigilant police ought to be established. The metropolis ought to be divided into districts, and a stricter watch set over those individuals who were habituated to crimes, and who were known not to obtain their living by honest means. If one quarter of the sum which they were devoting to this useless expense were expended on a watchful police, the commission of crime would soon receive an effective check, and they would not witness those disgraceful crimes which the metropolis had of late exhibited. He hoped the House would soon turn their attention to this subject. He did not think that a diminution of punishment could have the effect of preventing crime. A permanent and extensive effect could only be produced by a vigorous police. It was said that our prisons were nurseries of crime; that the comparatively innocent, from associating with hardened criminals, returned to society much worse members than when they entered the prisons. Why, he would ask, in the prisons of this metropolis, should persons, whose guilt was not established, be kept five or six weeks in the company of hardened criminals? At present, instead of the criminals being punished, society was punished; and society was punished because it was so negligent. Mr. C. Long said, the objections to the Penitentiary at Millbank ought to have been stated at an earlier period. It ought to be recollected that the Penitentiary was adopted by parliament after a great deal of discussion. He was astonished that the hon. gentleman should consider the amendment of the persons in that prison a secondary object. The hon. gentleman had said what was perfectly true, that innocent persons, from mixing with hardened criminals in prisons, came out depraved. Did he mean to say, then, that a system by which the amendment of prisoners was promoted, was not worth the attention of the House? It was true that a tower had been pulled down and rebuilt. (3 D) Those who planned and superintended the building had not the choice of the situation, which was pointed out by act of parliament. A small part of the building had given way, but the cause was known, and from the means which had been adopted, no further apprehension was entertained. All who had visited the building agreed, that it could not possibly be constructed on a plan better calculated to answer the object in view. The system appeared, as far as they had yet had any experience of it, to answer the purpose of those who projected it. This was very much owing to an hon. friend of his (Mr. Holford) who had devoted all his time to this object. Without a constant vigilance and superintendence, the hopes of the House from this prison would be frustrated. Mr. Lockhart explained. The right hon. gentleman had very much misunderstood him, if he supposed that he considered the amendment of prisoners a secondary consideration. He had merely said that this was secondary with reference to the greater consideration of preventing crime. Mr. Arbuthnot appealed to the hon. member for Shrewsbury as to the amelioration in the conduct of the prisoners in the Penitentiary. Mr. Bennet said, he approved, in great part, of the system pursued at Millbank, though he thought it admitted of improve ment Mr. Wynn said, that when they considered the great expense which the transportation of offenders occasioned to the country, and how little satisfactory the result had been, particularly in the case of females, they could not fail to view the Penitentiary plan as most beneficial to the country. The Resolution was then agreed to. The Chancellor of the Exchequer then moved, "That 725,6817. 12s. 3d. be granted on account of the sum of two milTions to be applied by his majesty, in concert with his majesty the king of the Netherlands, towards improving the defences of the Low Countries, by virtue of the Convention concluded on the 13th of August 1814." In proposing this vote, he had the satisfaction of informing the House, that the subject of the vote was not likely to occasion the charges upon the public that had at first been imagined; for the French government, it was a subject of considerable congratulation, had made no delay whatever in the payment of the charges which they had to bear. Mr. Warre observed, that by the treaty of 1815 there was to be set apart 60 millions of livres out of the 125 millions of livres which was to be paid by France to the Netherlands, for the reparation of the fortresses on the Flemish frontier. The whole expense of the reparation of these fortresses was estimated at 137 millions of livres. He did not know whether these 60 millions had already been expended by the king of the Netherlands in contributing to the repair of the fortresses; and he could wish to receive some information from the noble lord on this subject. Lord Castlereagh said, that as a consideration for the colonies ceded by Holland to this country, it was understood that Great Britain was to contribute equally with Holland towards the reparation of the fortresses on the French frontier. Sixty million livres to be received from France were to be appropriated to the same purpose. The contributions from France were to be applied in the first place towards that expense. could assure the hon. member that in all cases the sums received from France were appropriated to this object as soon as they came in; but the whole of the 60 millions of livres, had not been so employed, because this sum had not yet all come in. He Mr. Warre observed, that by an additional article of the treaty we were bound to bear equally with the king of the Netherlands such farther charges incurred in the reparation of the Belgic fortresses as should not make the sum to be paid by Great Britain to exceed in the whole three millions. He should like to know from the noble lord how far we were liable to pay more than two millions towards the repair of the fortresses? Lord Castlereagh said, the whole sum which Great Britain was bound to pay by the treaty, could not exceed two millions. Mr. Warre asked, if by the treaty we could not be called on to pay three millions in all towards the Belgic fortresses? The Chancellor of the Exchequer allowed that the treaty was not very clearly worded with respect to this matter; but there was a distinct understanding, that the whole sum which Great Britain should contribute towards the repair of the Belgic fortresses should not exceed two millions; and that the whole charge which could by any possibility be brought against Great Britain by the king of the Netherlands | would be sufficient. If it was desirable should not exceed three millions. Mr. Tierney was willing to believe that this was the understanding at signing the treaty, still, however, the treaty itself might be thought to bear a different construction. The Resolution was then agreed to. then, that the returns should be destroyed, it would be desirable that the means should be taken to produce a compliance with those orders which had been hitherto ineffectually given. The Treasury, and the Tax-office had at present no means to enforce compliance, if their directions were disobeyed. He should therefore move for a committee to inquire what steps had been taken. To this motion, he believed, no objection would be made. He was more disposed to do this, because he thought he had observed on former occasions a slowness in the Tax-office in attending to the orders of the House. It was a refractory department, though he attached no blame to his hon. and learned friend at the head of it; but there was something in the nature of the department which made them slow. If they might trust the index of the votes on the 3d of February a return had been moved for of the pensions of the late property tax inspectors, which return had not yet been made, though it might have been made in half the time. But ever since the slip the House had made two years ago, by the repeal of the Income tax, the House had been looked upon, by all concerned in the extracting money by taxation, with a jealous eye. He believed in many instances it would be found, that the names at the heads of the returns had only been altered by a stroke or two of the pen, or an attempt at erasure, which left them quite legible to eyes but half as sharp as those employed in the collection MR. BROUGHAM'S MOTION RESPECTING THE INCOME TAX RETURNS AND PAPERS.] Mr. Brougham said, he rose to make a proposition to carry into effect a measure, the propriety of which was admitted, he believed, on all sides of the House; he meant the destruction of all remains of that tax on which they had long ago passed a sentence of condemnation. The principle on which the motion proceeded was so obvious, that he should not offer a word in support of it, but he should shortly state the circumstances which now rendered it necessary. About two years ago the chancellor of the exchequer had stated, that he had given directions for the destruction of the returns under the income tax. Subsequently to that, it was found that these directions had been very imperfectly complied with; that the originals or copies of these returns were bandied about, and sold every where as waste paper, and that in some places a person could hardly go into a shop without seeing the returns of some of his neighbours, or perhaps his own. When this was mentioned, it was said, that steps would be taken to destroy the returns; and about the same time a circu-of taxes. In some of the instances he had lar was issued, requiring the officers to been made acquainted with, a person had destroy the original returns, preserving sent for goods from a chandler's shop, and copies, which were to be transmitted to with the goods were sent him a return of the tax-office in London, and there to be one of his neighbours income; and, on preserved. No farther notice had been making inquiry, he was directed to a place taken of the subject till within a few days, where he might find the returns of any when he had received information from person in the neighbourhood. The colpersons who had seen these returns scat- lector or assessor having failed, his waste tered about, as they had formerly been, paper had been sold, which consisted of in one part of the country. It was evi- such documents. It was a maxim of law dent there was no use in destroying the to trust every man in his own art. If the originals, if copies were left. For though object was to ascertain the utmost sum the names were left out, it was manifest which could be extracted from the people, that if all the details were preserved, any or to whip up arrears, he should be wilperson in the neighbourhood, not to speakling to trust the tax-gatherers; but when of the assessor, would be able to supply the names. On what ground could it be necessary to preserve these returns at all It was said, that they were necessary to check the returns of the county rate; but for this purpose the sums total, properly authenticated, of parishes or districts, the question was to destroy the relics of a was unchanged, or rather, if, out of the people, nine out of ten disapproved it at present, it was condemned by ninety-nine out of every hundred. The hon. and learned gentleman then moved, "That a committee be appointed to inquire into the steps which have been taken to destroy the Returns of Bodies Corporate and Individuals under the Income Tax acts." settling county-rates and assessments. He hoped, therefore, that the House, upon taking these circumstances into their consideration, would see no necessity for the appointment of a committee. Mr. Grenfell said, he completely concurred in opinion with his hon. and learned friend, as to the refractoriness evinced by the different offices connected with the department of taxes in complying with the orders of the House, but he could not agree with him in excepting the gentleman at the head of that department. He knew, however, that no blame could attach to the secretary of that department, whose conduct was in every respect highly creditable. He felt the greatest satisfaction in having to congratulate that House and the country on the admission then made for the first time, that the country was not again to be inflicted with the property tax. It was certainly a fair subject of congratulation to hear, that, though the right hon. gentleman considered the tax as right and proper in time of war, yet he would never recommend it in time of peace. This declaration was the more cheering, as a fear had been prevalent that a recurrence to this oppressive tax was still contemplated. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was doubtful whether any benefit could possibly arise from the appointment of such a committee as that now proposed by the hon. and learned gentleman. With respect to the charge made against the department of the income tax, of repugnance to comply with the orders of the House in the production of such documents as the House found necessary to call for, he believed that that department was not more averse than any other department in showing due compliance to their orders. The papers which the hon. and learned gentleman had alluded to, as an instance to prove the charge of reluctance, were long ago in possession of the House, and this the hon. and learned gentleman might have easily ascertained by inquiring at the vote office. The accounts called for respecting the inspectors of the income tax had been ordered on the 3rd of February, and it appeared they were returned on the 10th of February. With respect to the property tax, it was not his intention then to enter into its general merits. He knew it was burthensome to the country, though highly necessary to carry us through the arduous struggle in which we had then been engaged. In time of peace it was objectionable, and he trusted unnecessary. The object of the hon. and learned gentleman's motion was, that all papers of the description alluded to should be destroyed indiscriminately; but this could not be done, as some of them were absolutely necessary for the recovery of certain arrears of the property tax. Orders had been already given for Mr. Brougham expressed his surprise the destruction of all such as were not ne- at the language and conduct of the chancessary for the recovery of arrears, and cellor of the exchequer, who, after some the detection of fraud. All returns of little explanation not at all material to the commercial property, included in schedule question, declared his intention to vote B, were such as, from the circumstances against the motion. But what was this. of such property, ought certainly to be motion to which the right hon. gentleman destroyed, excepting such as were neces- professed so much objection? Why, sary for the recovery of arrears. It was simply for the appointment of a comjudged necessary to preserve copies of mittee to inquire what returns or papers some of these returns, because two dif- connected with the property tax had been ferent acts, passed in the year 1815, re- destroyed, or could be destroyed without ferred to these papers for the purpose of any injury to the public service. The Mr. C. Calvert took occasion to express a hope, that some measures would be taken to guard against the vexation to which several persons had been recently subjected under the system for collecting the assessed taxes. This vexation was, he knew, peculiarly felt in his own neighbourhood. For after the people had had their proportion of the tax fixed upon the rack rent, by a regular and respectable surveyor, an assessor appeared, who, without any previous survey, ordered an advance of the tax equal to 50, and even 100 per cent upon some premises. Such, indeed, was the grievous exaction demanded from the inhabitants of Isleworth, Twickenham, and Hampton. |