language of religious persecution, not of | to assist and support us in such an effort punishing men for being unwilling to be- as may be reasonably expected from the lieve, but of making them willing to believe. wealth and power of the country to raise, The House has no command of such in- from the year itself, the means towards struments as those; but I am silly enough meeting the expenses of the year. to believe, in spite of the Member for Huntingdon's high authority, the votes of this House have a considerable effect in inducing men to buy to-morrow what they will not buy to-day-to give a price tomorrow which they would not have given yesterday. And I rather think experience is on my side; because whereas fourteen or fifteen days ago people would give no more than 871. for an annuity of 100., bearing interest at 3 per cent in Consols, within the past three or four days they have been willing to give 891., and something more, for that very self-same annuity; and I am really apt to believe that certain votes of this House have had a great deal to do in bringing about that change. But if you are satisfied with these experimental effects of the votes of the House of Commons, I am still further weak enough to believe that, if it be the determination of the House of Commons that the financial measures of the Government for raising new taxes shall be passed into law, they will be passed into law, and that when they have been passed into law, no inconsiderable effect will be produced by that decision of Parliament on the views of many gentlemen who deal in the particular commodity of money in the City of London, gentlemen with respect to whom, permit me to say, if I have said, either on this or on a former occasion, one word which seemed to savour of disrespect, I deeply regret it, first, because I hold it is not for any one in this House to find fault with any class of his fellow-countrymen, and least of all is it consistent with duty or propriety in a Minister of the Crown; secondly, because, in my opinion, those Gentlemen have acted, in the exercise of a discretion to which they were perfectly entitled, just as this House will, I hope, use its own discretion, to which, on its side, it has a perfect title. As, then, Sir, Mr. Pitt made his appeal to the House of Commons, so we appeal to the House of Commons; as Mr. Pitt placed before the House of Commons his plan for its support in the system which he proposed for raising the necessary means from the country, and thereby obviating, as far as possible, the necessity for resorting to the creation of stock, so we, at the first moment of the war, make our proposals to the House of Commons, entreating them Sir, before I sit down, I have still to notice, that the right hon. Gentleman has referred to what was done in the year 1847; and I shall make a remark upon that subject. He says that in the year 1847 a loan was raised by Consols, and he asks what would be your condition now if in 1847 you had raised that loan by Exchequer bonds. It is quite unnecessary that I should enter into a comparison of the circumstances that dictated one course to my right hon. Friend (Sir Charles Wood) in the year 1847, and that dictates another course at the present moment. The exigencies of the two periods are entirely different; especially, I may observe, that that was an isolated operation; this is a period at which unfortunately we have before us the prospect of a continuing and extraordinary demand upon the public purse. I do not hesitate to say, however, that it appears to me the country would not now have been in a bad predicament if the money raised in 1847 had been raised by means of Exchequer bonds instead of by Consols. Yet one other word, Sir, with the permission of the House. The hon. Member for Huntingdon contends, according to the terms of his Motion, that it is most improper that we should bind ourselves to pay off the Exchequer bonds in a particular year; and I ask, is that doctrine sustainable by a reference to practice or experience? It is the very thing we do in the case of Exchequer bills; but, with this difference, that we do it annually, and do it for five times the amount. Within a few days it may be necessary to call in 9,000,000l. of Exchequer bills, and re-issue Exchequer bills for the same amount if the holders are willing to take them. But the hon. Gentleman, having felt that he had got into a considerable difficulty, drew a distinction between promising to pay off, and promising positively to pay off. I am unable to appreciate the value of the distinction certainly; and I do not believe that the hon. Gentleman, in the exercise of any other function which he may be called upon elsewhere to perform, will attach more value to a note which says, "I promise to pay," than to a note which says, "I promise positively to pay." And again, although he says that in the Exchequer bonds we say we promise positively to pay, and that in the Exchequer bills we only say we promise to | right hon. Gentleman also made this repay; yet that is not the fact; we make a mark, "You say the amount cannot be promise to pay in the case of Exchequer obtained by Exchequer bills." Damaged bonds precisely as we do in the case of Exchequer bills; the whole question, in each case alike, is the renewal on a given day, whether it shall be thought fit to renew on a given day, or to liquidate them, and the rate of interest to be paid in case we shall think fit to renew. The hon. Member for the Wick Burghs (Mr. Laing) has stated to-night that the railway companies throughout this country are renewing their debentures every year to the extent of 40,000,000l., and I want to know after that, whether any hon. Member will attempt to justify a vote in favour of the Amendment on the ground that we cannot renew, if need be, 2,000,000l. of Exchequer bonds by the use of the public credit? No, Sir; the plea is an idle one. As for us, we make our appeal again to-night to the House of Commons on the ground on which we stood. As for the matters in the first financial proposals of the year of retrospect, to which the hon. Gentleman refers, if he wishes for the opinion of the House of Commons on these matters, let him by all means raise the issue in plain and intelligible terms. But what we have now before us is, the question of whether the Queen's Government shall be permitted to raise money for the expenditure of the war in anticipation of the taxes, and until the proceeds of those taxes are received. We ask for that power. We make our appeal to the House of Commons, with the full confidence that the House of Commons will answer it. I join cordially in the sentiment expressed by the hon. Member for Huntingdon; I—and I am certain I may say the same on the part of my Colleagues -have no other desire but one, it is that the Committee shall vote on this Motion as they think shall be most for the advantage of the country. MR. T. BARING, in reply, said, that the right hon. Gentleman had put several questions to him which it was impossible to avoid answering. The first was-"Do you object to the amount of the grant?" And in answer, he must be allowed to say that the amount was not required. The whole deficiency was only 3,500,000l., and when, by the first Resolution, 2,000,000l. had been already obtained, and 4,000,000l. of taxes would come in in the course of six months afterwards, he did not think it was requisite to issue additional Exchequer bonds to the extent of 4,000,000l. The The Chancellor of the Exchequer as the market had been by the conduct of the right hon. Gentleman, we had seen, in the granting of 1,750,000l. Exchequer bills, that the Exchequer-bill market could still bear that amount. But when it was proposed to borrow at 4 per cent, payable in four years, when the rate of Exchequer bills, high as the rate in the market was, was only 3 per cent, he must confess he held the opinion that Government were borrowing in a very improvident manner for the country. And he held also that there was this advantage in Exchequer bills-in borrowing from year to year, when the war was short the rate of the bills could be reduced, while in pledging to pay for four years, if the war terminated to-morrow, the country would be bound to pay the 4 per cent. The right hon. Gen tleman said he had suspicions that he (Mr. Baring) intended a fortnight ago to make a Motion in favour of a loan, but he must tell the right hon. Gentleman that whatever he intended to have done he would have done openly. He had never had any other project or any other intention than to move the Resolution which he had already moved, and that Resolution was to this effect, that whereas he thought it unwise to fix any definite period for the payment of positive obligations, he thought it was much less dangerous to fix them after six years than it was according to the plan of the right hon. Gentleman to fix them now for four or five years. The right hon. Gentleman asked if he (Mr. Baring) said Exchequer bonds would be unacceptable in the City? Let the right hon. Gentleman look to his own lists, and he would see the opinion entertained of them; let him look first to the amount of subscriptions, and then let him say if there had been any general wish to have these bonds. He thought he had now answered all the questions of the right hon. Gentleman. He had moved the Amendment with no covert object and as no vote of want of confidence, but he thought it was unwise for the country to adopt the course the right hon. Gentleman was pursuing. The right hon. Gentleman said, "Bring the points you complain of to an issue in this House. He (Mr. Baring) would have said, let bygones be bygones, and he would not have alluded to the right hon. Gentleman if the right hon. Gentleman had not only challenged criticism, Goderich Tek Goulburn, rt, bon. H. but accused the House of gross ignorance. 'Gadeona, rt, ban. W. Question put, "That the words the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury be authorised to issue Exchequer Bonds stand part of the proposed Resolution." The Committee divided:-Ayes 290; Noes 186: Majority 104. Graham, rt, hon. Sir J. Matheson, A. Hadfield, G. Harcourt, G. G. Headlam, T. E. Heathcote, Sir G. J. Herbert, rt, hon. S. Heywood, J. Heyworth, L. Hindley, C. Hogg, Sir J. W. Horsman, E. Milner, W. ME Mines, R. M. Milton, La Muchell, T. A. Moffatt, G. Howard, hon. C. W. G. Palmerston, Viset. Howard, Lord E. Hughes, W. B. Berkeley, Adm. Berkeley, C. L. G. Divett, E. Duff, G. S. Hutchins, E. J. Hutt, W. Ingham, R. Jackson, W. Jermyn, Earl Johnstone, Sir J. Keating, R. Kershaw, J. King, hon. P. J. L. Peel, Sir R. Peel, F. Pellatt, A. Perry, Sir T. E. Peto, S. M. Philipps, J. H. Phillimore, J. G. Phinn, T. Labouchere, rt. hon. II. Ponsonby, hon. A. G. J. Phillimore, R. J. Pigott, F. Kinnaird, hon. A. F. Pilkington, J. Ewart, W. Kirk, W. Pollard-Urquhart, W. Fagan, W. Feilden, M. J. Laing, S. Price, Sir R. Langston, J. H. Price, W. P. Ferguson, Sir R. Langton, H. G. Pritchard, J. Ferguson, J. Laslett, W. Ramsden, Sir J. W. Fitzgerald, J. D. Lawley, hon. F. C. Ricardo, O. Fitzgerald, W. R. S. Layard, A. H. Rich, H. Fitzroy, hon. H. Lee, W. Richardson, J. J. Fitzwilliam, hón. G. W. Legh, G. C. Robartes, T. J. A. Lemon, Sir C. Roebuck, J. A. Fergus, J. Foley, J. H. H. Fortescue, C. S. Cobden, R. Cockburn, Sir A. J. E. Lewis, rt. hon. Sir T. F. Russell, Lord J. Lindsay, hon. Col. Lindsay, W. S. Locke, J. Fox, W. J. Lockhart, A. E. Freestun, Col. Lowe, R. Gardner, R. Luce, T. Geach, C. Mackie, J. Irton, S. Vernon, G. E. H. Vernon, L. V. Winnington, Sir T. E. Wise, A. Wood, rt. hon. Sir C. Young, rt. hon. Sir J. TELLERS. Hayter, rt. hon. W. G. List of the NOES. Coles, II. B. Compton, H. C. Corry, rt. hon. II. L. King, J. K. Knatchbull, W. F. Lisburne, Earl of Lockhart, W. Long, W. Lowther, hon. Col. Lytton, Sir G. E. L. B. Meux, Sir H. Montgomery, Sir G. Napier, rt. hon. J. Pakington, rt. hn. Sir J. Wynn, Sir W. W. Egerton, E. C. Elmley, Visct. Evelyn, W. J. Farnham, E. B. Farrer, J. Palk, L. Fellowes, E. Palmer, R. Parker, R. T. Wynn, Major H. W. W. Wynne, W. W. E. Yorke, hon. E. T. Bentinck, G. W. P. Beresford, rt. hon. W. Bernard, Visct. Forster, Sir G. Franklyn, G. W. George, J. Graham, Lord M. W. Halford, Sir H. Hamilton, G. A. Proposed Resolution amended by leaving out the word "the" in line 2, and inserting the word "any" instead thereof, and by leaving out the words "of 31. 10s." and inserting the words "not exceeding 47.," instead thereof. Original Question, as amended, "That the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury be authorised to issue Exchequer Bonds bearing interest at any rate not exceeding 41. per centum per annum, for any sums not exceeding in the whole 4,000,000l., at any prices and on any terms determined upon by the said ComHenley, rt. hon. J. W. missioners, such Bonds to be paid off at Hanbury, hon. C. S. B. Hayes, Sir E. Herbert, Sir T. Horsfall, T. B. Hume, W. F. par at the expiration of any period or periods not exceeding six years from the date of such Bonds," put, and agreed to. 781 Episcopal and Capitular {MAY 23, 1854} Estates Management Bill. 782 HOUSE OF LORDS, Tuesday, May 23, 1854. MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS.-1a Customs Duties. Reported.-Church Building Acts Amendment. EPISCOPAL AND CAPITULAR ESTATES MANAGEMENT, 1854, BILL. Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read. THE EARL OF DERBY said, that although he believed the Bill was one whose object was principally to continue the existing law, yet the occasion presented by the Motion for going into Committee upon it seemed to him to afford a good opportunity to call the attention of the Government to a question connected with the subject with which the measure proposed to deal. It would be in the recollection of their Lordships that upon the appointment of the Ecclesiastical Commission the subject of the rights of lessees of Church property had been one upon which there had been a great deal of discussion in both Houses of Parliament. While it had been argued, upon the one hand, that the lessee had no actual claim to the renewal of his lease, it had, upon the other hand, been admitted that the lessees having enjoyed their property for centuries by renewals, had by time acquired a sort of right. The management of the funds of the Church was now about to be transferred from the bishops to Commissioners-that was to say, from individuals whose tenure of life was uncertain to a body which, for all practical purposes, might be regarded as immortal. It was difficult to ascertain the precise amount of interest, in consequence of the change of circumstances, which remained vested in the lessees, but that they did possess a claim, to a certain extent, in right of their leases, had been admitted upon all hands. Now, both in the preamble and in the enacting clause of the Bill before the House the claim of the lessee to some consideration was distinctly There were two principal recognised. The classes of lessees, each of whom complained of grievances arising under the present system. He had no personal knowledge on the subject; but from communications which had been made to him within the last twelve hours, by certain gentlemen who took great interest in the question, and who had given to it the greatest attention, he was led to believe that the right of the lessee had always been practically recognised in the case of leases granted for a term of years. Commissioners, he thought he was correct in stating, usually refused a permanent renewal of a lease, but admitted a renewal for an additional term of seven years beyond the existing holding--that was to say, that in the case of persons who had a lease for a term of twenty-one years originally, and had now eighteen years still remaining, the Commissioners agreed, in consideration of that time, to grant one more renewal of seven years, making, in addition to the eighteen years, a period altogether of twenty-five years. Now, the only complaint, so far as he could learn, with respect to the mode in which lessees for a term of years were dealt with, was, that, according to the Act, there was no restriction whatever placed upon the Commissioners in estimating the value of the property, or the sum to be paid in the shape of fine on renewal. It was considered highly desirable that there should be some check placed upon their power in that respect, and that recourse should be had to some mode of controlling that power by referring the question of the value of property to arbitration. In regard to lessees for lives, he might observe that a lease for life was altogether different from a lease for a term of years; it was, in fact, a more permanent and a higher interest. He had been informed that in the case of leases for lives the Commissioners in general refused to enfranchise, and that if they enfranchised, they took the value of the lives precisely at the same amount at which an actuary would place them. The complaint, therefore, which was made upon that head was, that in estimating the value of the lives the Commissioners had |