not be said to have reformed the duties / spoken of it, no doubt, in my Budget on locomotion without beginning with speech for convenience, as being the sum railways. The answer is a very plain which enables me to remit taxes; but it and simple one. The railway question does not do so, except by setting at liberty is one which can be settled only by an other sums of money which enable me arrangement being come to between the to remit taxation. I put it in this way, Government and the railways; it is not Suppose the Indian Government, being all on one side. We have a good deal ashamed of having run up so large a to ask from the railways as well as to bill, should take it into its head to pay give them. I shall be glad to enter into off £3,000,000 of this Abyssinian diffinegotiations with the railway companies culty, should I not then be in a condition on the subject, for I am quite willing to to remit the taxes ; and what does it consider the possibility of doing any- signify whether the Indian Government thing in reason to relieve them if they pay it, or I obtain it in this way? It is will entertain such propositions as the true, the money will never come again, Government may make with regard to but then the debt will never come again. public convenience, the carryi of letters Then I have been asked to state what and troops, and other matters. It is will be the effect of the repeal of the quite possible that if they take this hint corn duties with regard to other duties, some arrangement may be come to which such as the duty on arrowroot. Of course, may be advantageous to both parties. they will fall with it. This change Of course, the railways form the principal will not only remove the duty on corn, means of locomotion, and could I have but that on fourteen other articles. One regulated the terms of a contract the hon. Gentleman reproached me because I railways would not have been omitted have not taken the duty off currants. I: from the Budget. With regard to the should be glad to do so, but there is an Civil Service, my estimate is not irre- obstacle in the way. The state of the concileable with that previously sub-case is this—Currants are subject to an mitted to the House, and the Secretary export duty in Greece; they are the subto the Treasury will to-morrow, on go-ject of monopoly, and if I were to take ing into Committee, explain the matter off the duty in England they would put in more detail. I did not intend to ex- it on in Greece, we should lose revenue, haust the subject, but I showed plainly and we should not be a bit nearer a free that the increase in the estimate is ac- breakfast table. The worthy Alderman är counted for by causes over which the the Member for the City of London (Mr. Government have no control. I have Alderman Lawrence) asked whether we been asked whether I propose that people should return insurance duty to any genshall be taxed in respect of the period tleman who was patriotic enough to pay that will elapse between the months of insurance seven years in advance; and I April and January, and whether a man think we should not. When the duty who marries in April will be taxed for was reduced from 3s. to 18. 6d. I never his establishment ?" I say, if he marries heard of any one being patriotic enough in April and if his matrimonial specula- to come forward and pay us the differtion turns out unfortunate, and he hangs ence then; and, after the course taken himself on the 29th of December, there by the hon. Member for Dudley (Mr. will be no tax upon his establishment. Sheridan) on this subject, they would be That will be a period of remissions, of very imprudent persons who would have compensation for the change from paying paid insurance seven years in advance, taxes at the end to paying them at the and would well deserve to lose their beginning of the year. It has been money. An hon. Member asked me pressed upon me by the hon. Member whether we hoped to have the income for South Lancashire (Mr. Cross) and tax collected by the 1st of February. others that I am doing an improvident All that is proposed is that the income thing because, on the strength of the tax shall become due on the 1st of money I receive by this single operation, January, but we cannot hope to collect I remit permanent taxation, and that the whole of it in the first quarter, beobjection would be conclusive if it were tween January and April. It is right to well-founded; but I think it is not well mention this, lest it should be supposed founded, because the question is as to the that we contemplated employing some appropriation of that money. I have extraordinary means to collect the tax. We would be content to collect it as it has hitherto been received. Again I thank the House for the manner in which my statement has been received. MR. HUNT wished to know whether the loss on the income tax was a real loss to the revenue, and also what was the estimated amount of the balances in the Exchequer at the end of next year? MR. STANSFELD replied, that the deficit of £82,000 on the calculation of the income tax was, as far as he knew, only a postponement, and was estimated in the revenue for next year. With reference to the question of the balances, he thought the right hon. Gentleman was under an entire misapprehension. His right hon. Friend said that after deducting the advance of the Bank of England there would remain a balance of £2,775,000, but if the balance was carried on to the end of the year there would be £2,000,000 to be advanced out of Ways and Means. This, with the surplus anticipated in the Budget, would bring the balance up to £5,317,000. Question put "That, towards raising the Supply granted to Her Majesty, the Duty of Customs now charged on Tea shall continue to be levied and charged on and after the 1st day of August 1869 until the 1st day of August 1870, on the importation thereof into Great Britain and Ireland: viz. s. d. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, he understood that there would be no objection to the Resolutions. MR. HUNT said, it was most unusual to take any Resolution the same evening as the Budget was proposed, but he had no objection to the Resolution with regard to tea. He wished to know when the whole of the Resolutions would be before the House in print? CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) SECOND READING. Order for Second Reading read. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."-(Mr. W. E. Forster.) MR. E. EGERTON said, he felt it to be his duty not to allow the present stage of the measure to pass without, in the interests of his constituents in Cheshire, calling attention to its provisions. The case of Cheshire was one of peculiar hardship, and it had suffered much from previous legislation on the subject of the cattle plague. The county contained 487 townships, 406 of which had been seriously affected by the dis ease. 35,000 head of cattle had been killed there before the passing of the Compensation Act in 1866, and he contended that, inasmuch as those cattle were slaughtered for the public advantage, it was not fair that the loss of them should fall upon that particular locality, but should be made chargeable to the country at large. He, under those circumstances, felt bound to tell the right hon. Gentleman the Vice-President of the Council frankly that, when the details of the Bill came on for consideration in Committee, a demand would be made by himself and those who took the same view of the question for the Re-insertion of a clause making it obligatory on the country at large to pay the compensation for a loss which was incurred for the general good, instead of throwing it upon the locality itself. He would only add that upwards of 400 Petitions had been presented on the subject from different parts of Cheshire, and he trusted some means would be found of alleviating the grievance of which they so justly complained. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, he would not press the Resolutions, and asked whether there would be any objection to take the solution on which the Bill was founded in reference to the transfer of the collection of the assessed taxes? MR. HUNT said, he did not object to that course being taken. Motion agreed to. (1.) Resolved, That, towards raising the Supply granted to Her Majesty, the Duty of Customs now charged on Tea shall continue to be levied MR. J. B. SMITH considered the | to exempt places like Manchester, which Act of 1866 the most extraordinary Act had a court of quarter sessions, from that over was perpetrated, and regretted the cattle rate, while all municipal bothat similar unjust principles had been roughs were placed on the same footing embodied in the present Bill. The right as the agricultural districts, and were hon. Gentleman the President of the made to pay for the compulsory slaughter Board of Trade (Mr. Bright), when the of cattle in the county to prevent the Bill of 1866 was brought in, objected to spread of the contagious disease to their the course then proposed as very unwise, cattle. The injustice of such a law will because it was logislating for a panic, be seen from the fact that Salford, which and "There was," he said, "hardly any- had only five cows, had to pay £1,985 thing more absurd and pernicious than as its share of the county compensation, a panic." The House might form some while Manchester, which had a court of idea of that panic when they were told quarter session, paid only £7 for the that the Bill was passed in the course loss of a cow in that city; Preston, with of four days, and that it laid down dif- two cows, paid to the county £1,195; ferent principles with regard to compen- Halifax, having no cattle, paid £876; sation for cattle compulsorily slaughtered and Oldham, with one cow, paid £1,227. in England and Scotland. The principle The towns which had no cows should for England was that no borough should surely be excepted from rates for staybo exempt from contributing to com- ing the spread of disease; for the inpensation unless it had a court of habitants there suffered enough in the quarter sessions, while in Scotland all increased price paid for their meat, boroughs or towns were exempted from butter, and milk. But there was no inpayment of compensation for cattle com-justice to equal that inflicted on Cheshire. pulsorily slaughtered. About a fortnight after the passing of the English and Scotch Act, a Cattle Discases Bill was brought in for Ireland which differed altogether from the former, and enacted that compensation for cattle compulsorily slaughtered should be levied on all the Poor Law Unions-this change was at once a recognition of the unjust principle of the previous English Bill. The right hon. Baronet the Member for Morpeth (Sir George Grey) in his speech in introducing the Cattle Diseases Bill for England, in 1866, said "The speech from the Throne deeply affects the interests of the people of this country, and when I speak of the interests of the people of this country I do not mean the interests of one class or another but the interests of the whole community." No doubt the right hon. Baronet intended to legislate in the spirit of this declaration, because the Bill he brought in made no distinction between England and Scotland, the boroughs in both countries being exempted from contributing to the compensation for any cattle compulsorily slaughtered except in their own boroughs; but, strange to say, in the legislative panic which then existed, a clause was smuggled in at the last moment without previous notice altering the definition of the term borough in England and confining its meaning to a town having a court of quarter session. The effect of this alteration was The Bill enacted that, wherever the cattle plague broke out, the area for the payment of compensation for cattle compulsorily slaughtered should be the county. Now, Cheshire had suffered more than any other county. It lost 37,000 cattle before the Bill passed, and got no compensation for these, and then 35,000 cattle were compulsorily slaughtered for whose benefit? For the benefit of those who had healthy cattle in other parts of the country, and who, in consequence of the disease being thus stopped, saved their cattle and were able to get a higher price for them. Yet those persons had never paid a farthing. This was what he complained of. The borough which he represented (Stockport) had three cows, and would have to pay something like £30,000 as its share of the county rate. That was a case of the grossest injustice, not to be paralleled in any civilized country in the world. If such a case had occurred in Turkey, wo should havo said-" What can you expect in a country where life and property are at the disposal of a despot?" He complained that the unjust and objectionable portions of the existing law were embraced in the present Bill, and, while he consented to the second reading of the Bill, he claimed the right farther to discuss it and to propose such alterations as appeared to him to meet the justice of the case. that it began ab initio. It did away with all the previous restrictions obtained through such long experience and pressure, although it re-enacted them aftorwards, and the adoption of such a course was calculated to raise doubts in the minds of those with whom the present restrictions had obtained the force of prescriptive law. The moment those doubts were raised all the old agitation would begin again.. One thing was certain, and that was that, as had been proved by the cases of France, of Belgium, of Holland, and of this country during the last two years, it was possible to keep out the plague; but that should be done, of course, with the least practicable amount of annoyance and inconvenience. He did not deny that such an object might be attained under the provisions of the Bill; but he thought they ought to obtain some better assurance than had yet been given that stringent measures for that purpose would, in case of necessity, be adopted. He did not be MR. CORRANCE said, he did not intend to oppose the second reading of the Bill, but he was afraid that to the public at large it would not afford that amount of protection to which they considered themselves entitled. He used the words "public" designedly, because, after all, in the long run, it was the public, that is, the consumers, who paid for these calamities. He confessed that the Bill seemed to him to be intended to enable the Privy Council to do something that could be done without. After all, the Privy Council had never had the cattle plague while the cattle had had Privy Council enough. The Privy Council seemed to be passing this Bill on their own account, because they were afraid of something, and they certainly had reason to be afraid of pressure from certain places. The arguments and theories of hon. Gentlemen opposite went some way to justify the precaution of the Privy Council against themselves. Three of their theories were of an extraordinary character. First, there was the Provi-lieve that any market authority would, dential theory of the right hon. Member for Newcastle, and then the cry of Protection; but he warned hon. Gentlemen opposite that if that cry was used in this loose way, at all times and places, in order to suit certain circumstances or cases, there was serious danger that a most important, most useful, and most elementary part of economical science might fall into disrepute, and it was matter for regret that Mr. Mill was no longer in the House to rebuke such a sentiment. The third theory was, that, with regard to the movement of cattle in the limits of this country, foreign and English stock should be placed upon the same footing. That meant that, because we were unfortunately obliged to put certain restrictions on foreign cattle and he thought it a great misfortune-we should therefore put similar restrictions upon English cattle. In other words, having raised the price of meat by the restrictions which we were forced to place on foreign cattle, we were to raise the price much more by imposing restrictions on home produce. The right hon. Gentleman who had charge of the Bill (Mr. W. E. Forster) had detected all the fallacies involved in these theories, but it was significant that he should hear them uttered from the Benches behind him. One of the faults of the present Bill was under the present Bill, advance the nocessary funds for the construction of a foreign cattle market; but that was only an argument against the Bill, and not against the market, and he asked whether the right hon. Gentleman could not propose some provision to supply this defect in the measure. SIR ROBERT ANSTRUTHER reminded the hon. Member that the House had to choose between the proposition to place the responsibility of preventing the cattle disease on the Privy Council, or a system of permanent restriction embodied in the Bill of the noble Lord (Lord Robert Montagu); and the Bill of the Government was, in his opinion, much to be preferred. The Government assumed the chronic state of the animals imported into this country to be one of health, while the noble Lord had assumed it to be one of disease. Under the present measure, the restrictions on importation would be reduced to a minimum, while precautions would be taken against the spread of the disease. Cattle slaughtered by the order of the inspector were slaughtered for the good of the public, because if the cattle plague spread the price of meat could not be kept down; therefore, the question connected with compensation for the slaughtered cattle deserved great consideration. Cheshire, the cattle plague had been In most ruinous in its effects, and yet, after in its present form, the greatest injusmany men had been deprived of their tice would be done to a very large and fortunes by the disease, they were called influential class of persons. Representon to pay compensation. He under- ing a large agricultural constituency, he stood that a meeting had been held that said what was wanted was this-they afternoon in the Tea Room in reference should have, not Protection, but prevento the establishment of metropolitan tion of disease, which would be as fair markets for foreign cattle, and he be- for the consumer as for the producer. lieved that the subject had been consi- He would now divide the Bill into three dered by the right hon. Gentleman the parts. The first portion of it, which Vice President of the Council, and that consolidated all old Acts, was excessively he would be able to give an assurance good, and he had no objection to see it that some satisfactory arrangement would carried. The second related to the rebe come to in reference to it. There strictions that were to be placed upon was one part of the Bill in which he home cattle; and with respect to this he should move an Amendment-he meant would only say that the farmers had no the 61st clause relating to the transit of objection whatever to some restrictions cattle by rail. Nobody who had not in- being placed upon them, provided that vestigated the subject was aware of the they in their turn were protected from dreadful torture inflicted upon these the importation of disease from foreign animals under the present system of cattle. And with respect to the third conveying them from place to place. point, the importation of foreign catVery often the poor dumb creatures had tle, he wished, both in the interest of to pass four, five, and even six days the producer and consumer, that they without even food or water, and their should be imported freely, but in order sufferings were very great. Apart from that that should take place there must the cruelty of such a system, there could be some proper place of import-there be no doubt the quality of the meat should be a foreign cattle market in must be very much deteriorated. He London. With that they would be satisshould, therefore, in face of the railway fied. Without it they could not prevent interest, which was so strong in that disease spreading all over the country. House, be prepared to move words ren- He was prepared to stand by these prindering it compulsory to find food and ciples in Committee on the Bill. water for all animals being conveyed by railway beyond a certain distance or being detained on their journey beyond a certain length of time. In other respects he thought the principle of the Bill should not be interfered with. COLONEL BARTTELOT said, he was not one of those who had attended the Tea Room meeting referred to; but he was rather surprised to hear the remarks of the hon. Baronet on that subject, especially when it was known that the Scotch Members were in the habit, not only of meeting in the Tea Room, but deciding there exactly what they should do before they came into that House. [Sir ROBERT ANSTRUTHER: Not in the Tea Room.] Well, in some more convenient apartment. He (Colonel Barttelot) entirely denied that the Bill was in accordance with the opinions of the majority of the House. He gave the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council the fullest credit for introducing the measure under the impression that he was about to do justice to all parties; but if it were passed MR. RYLANDS said, that the provisions of the Bill before the House had reference to two main points-the restriction upon the importation of cattle, and the compensation for compulsory slaughter. He had supposed from the opening remarks of the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Corrance) that he complained of the restrictive clauses of the Bill being too stringent, but it afterwards appeared that he was desirous of greater restrictions. He (Mr. Rylands) agreed with the hon. Baronet the Member for Fife (Sir Robert Anstruther), that the amount of restrictions imposed should be the minimum which was consistent with the necessary amount of security. He considered that this was sufficiently met by the Bill of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. W. E. Forster), and he should therefore give it his support. But his principal object in rising was to refer to the compensation clauses which pressed very unfairly upon the borough he represented. Warrington had had to pay a considerable sum as a rate-in-aid for Cheshire, whilst Wigan, |