On this page

• Text (1)

  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.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• 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.

    Untitled Article

    India were pioperly applied it would be useless for America aay longer to expect to compete "with India in the production of cotton . Mr . "V , Scully expressed a hope that the right lion , gentleman would earnestly turn liis attention to a reform of the land tenure of India . By so doing the- prosperity of that country would be based on a sound foundation . He had a letter from Toonah , which described in the most graphic terms the wretchedness of the peasantry , and the sufferings they endured from famine . The resolutions were agreed to .

    APPOINTMENTS UNDEK THE ARISTOCRATIC SYSTEM . On Tuesday , Mr . F . Lucas took advantage of a technical opportunity to call the attention of the House of Commons ( about 50 members present ) to the " Edmund O'Flaherty case . " The words of the notice on the paper were these : — " " On consideration of the Consolidation Fund ( Appropriation ) Bill , as amended , to ask a question of the Chancellor of the Exchequer as . to the office of the Special Commissioner of Income-tax in Ireland ; and to call the attention of the House to circumstances connected with the appointment of persons intrusted with the collection of the revenue . " The reasons which had induced him to give this notice were , said Mr . Lucas , these : —

    " There had been for a considerable number of weeks past in the public journals statements of a very painful and unpleasant kind , that a certain gentleman who had been appointed , it was understood , by the Chancellor of the Exchequer , about a year and a half ago , to a place of great trust and confidence * had absconded—or , at least , had l « ft the country?—haying , as it was stated , committed forgeries to the , extent of from 14 , 0 . 0 W , to 20 fiOOL He did not say that these forgeries bad been committed , but the public journals did say that they had been , and by a gentleman who had , not much more than a year ago , been appointed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to a place of great trust and confidence . He had waited , week after week , in the hope that some other person would bring the matter before the House , but , no one having done so , he had felt it to be a duty to mention the matter , at however late a period of the

    • session . Oft the 5 th of July last , a statement was made in rthe Tivies newspaper that this gentleman , a Special Commissioner of the income-tax an Ireland , had absconded under peculiar and not very reputable circumstances . This statement of the 5 th . of July was repeated in the same journal on the 12 th of the same month , at much , greater length and in much fuller detail , and it was distinctly stated that this gentleman had quitted the country , having committed forgeries to the extent of between li . OOO ? . and 20 , OOOJ . Mr . O'Flaherty , the offender in question , had , before the Dnngarvan committee , sworn that the appointment had been conferred upon him by the right honourable gentleman wholl y unsolicited by himself , or by any of his friends or acquaintances ; that he had never in his life applied to the Government , directly or indirectly , for any place on the face

    of the earth ; and that the appointment had been conferred upon him by the right honourable gentleman as a purely voluntary and unsolicited pledge of the right honourable gentleman ' s personal friendshi p for him . Now , if the right honourable gentleman contradicted this sworn evidence , and told them that there were correspondence and testimonials in connexion . with this appointment to which he must refer before he could explain the matter , most assuredly , ho would take tho slightest word of the right honourable gentleman in preference to the sworn evidence of the ex-Special Commissioner of Income-tax . ( ' Hear hear , ' and laughter . ) The appointment of Special Commissioner of Income-tax in Irelaud was one of far hi g her importance tlian the commissionerships of income-tax m England , involving more responsible functions , and conferring far higher powers . It was a place

    of very great trust , of Urge discretion , of extensive authority , which gave to a dishonest holder the opportunity of committing almost unlimited fraud , and to a partisan holder tho opportunity of committing the utmost wrong and injustice towards political opponents . By tho agency of compositions for income-tax , allowances , exemptions , and in fifty other ways , the Special Commissioner of Income-tax in Ireland had the means , wore ho base enough , of perpetrating any umount of fraud . The holder oF such a post « pu <* ht to bo a man by his social position above tho temptation to dishonesty , and by Ins personal . character ubovo tho suggestion of partiality or unfairnoss . But how stood the case as to Mr . O'Flaherty ? Was his pecuniary position such aa to render him exempt from all suspicion of liability tO temntation ? Whv . so far from -his nnqannQinrr f . li /» nnoli

    ttcation of 5000 J . of reul , or of 200 / . per annum of personal property , everybody , at tho time of his appointment , knew that ho wna a man who had no property at all ; that , on tho contrary , ho was n man weighed down by debt , that lie had not n single farthing in tho world clear of his heavy dobts and engagements—of itBolf a sufficient reason why ho should u-. ) t have been nominated to tho post , contrary to tho whole spirit of tho act—while , aa to tho atria impartiality which should characterise such an officer , ovorybody knew tlmt Mr . O'Flalicrty ' u solo recommendation to tho right hon . gentleman's patronage h «« l been his unhesitating devotion to the Governmentna a political partisan , hi » unquestioning activity im a , political agont . Ho had himaolf no personal knowledco

    of Mr . O'l ' lahorty , but from his knowledge othorwiso of that ^ ontleman , ho waa prepared to s « y that tlioro wi \ a no man in Ireland to whom he should bavo bcon more unwilling to submit hia private accounts ; and ho wns prepared to express the bolipf tlmt thia feeling was allured by all persons in that . country who wore opposod politically to tho party by whom Mr . O Flaherty bad Ibuou , appointed . Did tho right hon . gentleman moan to nay ho did not know , at tho time this moat unluolcy appointment waa made , that the object of his I ? K 6 ° » i 9 dabbling , waa wallowing in bill transactions litouj utterly and hopolosuly insolvent ? This , npairt from - **• iJtr ?**! " ftPP 0 J » ° < "tnco , was quito n suflioiont oondom-* ¦ S * hi i ° *" > tho n PP ' «"> nt" Tlio ftppohrtmonfc of Me , Stonov waa a most roprohonijilblo aot , but tho inotivos for it woro tho

    most high and honourable that could be imagined ; every one admitted that the appointment of Mr . Lawley was most reprehensible , but every one conceded that the motives for it were of the highest and most exalted character ; and so the motives for the appointment of Mr . Edmund O'Flaherty , a dabbler in bill transactions , a furious political partisan , a person in whom no class of his fellow-citizens could place the slightest confidence , might have been the most high and honourable , although the appointment itself was a most reprehensible and damning proceeding . " Mr . Gladstone replied very quietly , and cleverly evasively . Why had Mr . Lucas given him only one day's notice of this motion ? Why had Mr . Lucas not waited until Mr . O'FIahorty's brother , a member of the House , was in his place ? ( Mr . O'Flaherty , M . P ., would take care not to be present—so that the

    questioruis—why did not Mr . Lucas wait till next session , or the session after that ?) Mr . O'Flaherty had ceased to be Income-tax Commissioner before he absconded , the office having been abolished : Mr . O'Flaherty had not taken any public money : and what had Mr . Gladstone to do with Mr . O'F . 's private misdeeds ? As to Mr . O'Flaherty's character , previous to the appointment being made , it was represented to him ( Mr . Gladstone ) as first-rate . t ! With regard to his fitness for the office , he ( Mr . Gladstone ) had taken pains to obtain the most competent person , and hk had consulted the Secretaiy for Ireland , who recommended Mr . O'Flaherty , whom lie had believed to be a respectable person , and he knew nothing of his partisanship . He was a brother of-a . member of the House who was spoken of in terms of warm esteem by persons on whose judgment lie placed the firmest reliance . "

    The-, subject : would then have dropped ; but Mr . DisRAiEtT did not fail to reraind the House that this Mr . O'FlahertjjLwas the person who , on the occasion of the Keogh scandal , was offered as evidence ( on his "honour" ) that Lord Naas , Mr . Disraeli ' s Irish Secretary , had offered the Irish Solicitor-Generalship , under Lord . Derby , to the Mr . Ke ' og-h , for whose appointment by Lord Aberdeen the Coalition was attacked by Lord Derby's Lord-Lieutenant . Mr . Disraeli asked—J 3 id any one believe that now ? No one answered : —hot even Mr . Keogh . The subject did then drop .

    THE BRIBERY BILL . This bill was read a third time in the House of Lords on Monday night . A slight debate took place with , reference to the clause legalising " travelling expenses , " to which the Marquis of Cla . nrica . rde strongly objected . Ultimately the Duke of Newcastle , to the astonishment of the House , undertook to withdraw the clause , thus leaving the law to remain as at present—that is uncertain . There was a division ; but fouc peers only voted for retaining the clause . The Lords' Amendments were taken into consideration in the Commons next day : Lord John Russell mildly-moving that these amendments be agreeid with , suggesting that , " at that period of the session , " there \ vas no time for disagreement . A long battle ensued .

    Lord Hotham adverted to what ho considered the singular and almost unprecedented position in which this motion placed the House , and to the manner in which , and the time . at which , the amendments were made . He had never yet seen , he said , a Minister ask the concurrence of the House to an amendment made by the House of Lorda in an opposite sense to that in which he had repeatedly spoken and voted , and , in effect , to stultify itself . The only resource for those

    who objected to tho omission of the 26 th clause ( relating to travelling expenses ) at this moment was tho extreme measure of moving an adjournment ; but ho implored the noble lord not to reduce them to the alternative of cither taking a course most repugnant to their feelings , or of making a bttse and pusillanimous surrender of their conscientious duty ' . He moved that the further consideration of this particular amendment ho deferred for a month .

    Lord J . RugsEix observed , that the clause in question was not in his bill when first brought in , nor was it a primary object of tlio measure . When tho subject of tho declaration waa diaeussod , it was considered that there should be a clear doflnition of what wore legal expenses , and ho hnd therefore advised tho House to agree to this clause , legalising travelling expenses . Tlio motion of Lord Hotham , if carried , would of course defeat tho measure . Mr . Hildyaht ) urged the necessity of insisting unon the retention of thia clause lotting the responsibility of making a crusade against the franchise of tho poorer class of voters rest with tlio House of Lords .

    Mr . IlufliE said he had hitherto taken no part in tho discussio ns upon this bill , believing it would bo ineffectual without tho ballot ; but ho approved tho omission of this clause . Voters ehould como to the poll nt thoir own expense . Tho Sjpioakbk having explained to Lord Ilotham that tho oflbct of his motion would bo to defeat tho bill , Lord IIothaji Bold that , was not his object , which waa merely to prevent tho agroomont of tho IIouso in tho omiasion of thia particular clause . Mr . T . Dunoombk , after strongly condemning tho

    resolution of the House of Lords limiting the period for passing bills , observed that the defeat of this bill would be no real loss ; he believed it would prove a mockery and delusion , and he should move to continue it for twelve months only . Sir J . Pai * ington thought it was not for the credit or character of the House that , in the middle of August , witli a bare quorum , it should be called upon to reverse a determination which had been arrived at by a full House . He should -vote for the motion of Lord Hotham , even if its effect would be to defeat the bill , which he believed , with Mr . Duncombe , would prove a delusion . Mr . G . Butt , Mr . Wilkinson , and Mr . Cayley spoke in favour of agreeing with the Lords' amendment .

    Mr . Malins supported Lord Hotham's motion , and called for an explanation of the extraordinary circumstances of a member of the Cabinet in the House of Lords moving the omission , of a clause which had been proposed and supported by his colleagues in this House . After a few remarks by Sir C . Bdreell against the Lords' amendment , and by Lord R . Grosvenob in its favour , the motion of Lord Hotham was negatived upon a division by 78 to 21 . Lord Hotiiaji then , in . conformity with the inti > ttiation he had given , moved that the House do adjourn , and this motion was likewise negatived upon a division by 84 to 16 . Mr . Home moved that the debate be adjourned .

    _ Lord J . Russell expressed a hope that the question would be fairly decided upon the issue , whether the House would agree or disagree with the Lords ' amendment . After a further discussion , a third division took place , which negatived the motion for an adjournment of the debate by 81 to 15 . Lord iloT . iiam thereupon moved that the House ( which was getting thinner and thinner ) do adjourn , and this motion being negatived upon a division , Mr . Malins proposed , as a compromise , as no notice had been given to absent members of the subject of discussion , that the debate should be adjourned until Thursday . He accordingly moved its adjournment .

    Lord J . Russell said it was quite obvious that an adjournment of the debate until Thursday would give great advantage to Lord Hotham ; the debate would be prolonged , and the prorogation -would be postponed , or the bill would be lost . This motion , after another discussion , was negatived upon a division . Another motion for the adjournment of the House met the same fate . Lord Hotham then moved the adjournment of the debate ; but , at the suggestion of Mr . T . Buncombe , a compromise was at length effected l > y Lord J . Iius 3 ell assenting to the limitation of the bill to one year , and until the end of the next session of Parliament , and Lord Hotham thereupon withdrawing his opposition . "

    The bill was amended accordingly , and the oniis sion of the 26 th clause , with tho other Lords' amend ments , was agreed to .

    THE RUSSIAN SUCUltmES BILL . This bill came before the Lords on Wednesday . Lord Fortuscvb . moved a resolution , suspending standing orders , and calling upon the House to coifsider tho second reading . The Duko of Newcastle seconded tho motion : — " Ho wns not prepnred to say that tho bill , even in tin ; toi-m in which it came up from the House of Commons , wna rendered very necessary on account of tho existing state of tlio law . Ho would bo sorry to recognise the essential necessity of such legislation , but tlio bill had Leon denuded of many of tho objectionable provisions which ho had reason to believe it contained when it was originally presented to the other iiouso . lie would bo most unwilling either for himself or _ on tho part of tlid Government , to throw any obstacle in the way of a measure which wns consijorod necessary by the other House of Parliament , with tho \ i « w of nsxi « timr

    Her Majesty ' s Government in maintaining tho interests ul Una country in its conflict with Russia , lie wished to state , however , that tho subject to which this bill referred had not boon negloctod by hoc Majesty ' s ( Jovornmoiit . When un announcement waa made upon tho Exchange in tlii . s country and in other countries that Itumiia was about to endeavour to contract n loan , her Majesty ' s Government without a moment ' s dohiy , Uwlc tlio opinion of tho law officers or tho Crown m to how far it would bo lo » l for British subjects to have uny ooncurn in such a lonn , tlio obvious intention of which w « h to enable a foreign Powor to mimi forms ndvorto to thin nation and Crown- Tho law © flicors cavo t \ distinct and positive opinion that any Hriliali mxbjectswho woro parties to Much u loan would be guilly of high trenson . I hereupon , without twenty- ( bur hours delay , the noble curl at Uia head of the Foreign Department wroto to nil our Ministers at lorwfin courts , , md to all urn- connulti nbroiul , dflturiii R thein to fiivo n i . ublie intimation that Uritibh

    NiuyooiH wouiu incur tluwi hom-y penalties If thoy involved Uionittul yoH n . any transaction * connected with the in'opownl •> nn . Jo uliow tlmt tk'MO Mops were taken on tlio ns ant , lio might mention Hint sonio lime back replica ¦ «( been roooivcil from tho United SUtos of Ammkn , o the instructions which had Icon sent out to tho ngcntrt ol Una country there . Her IVhiJcBty ' s Government had nltio oommunionfod with tho Mhiiotcrs of this country at foreign Uourtn , uiHlructfiig thorn to make earnest npponlH to the Oourta to which tlioy wore uccredited , desiring thoao Courts

    Untitled Article

    748 * ¦ T HE L E ABE R . [ Saturday ,

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), Aug. 12, 1854, page 748, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2051/page/4/