credit-if I saw in them any danger that the good faith of the country could in the slightest degree be shaken, or its means of meeting its obligations be any way affected my noble Friend may depend upon it that he would not more warmly oppose them than would myself and my Colleagues in this and the other House of Parliament. But, my Lords, I see no symptoms of any apprehension for the credit of the country. At no period of time were the funds of this country in a higher, or more prosperous, or steady condition than they are at the present moment; and therefore my noble Friend, aware of the importance of this fact, is compelled to have recourse to some excuse, and he says that if the funds are high they ought not to be, and that they would have been much higher if we had not thrown the country into a state of alarm by the measures which he supposes (I know not on what ground) Her Majesty's Government have in contemplation. My noble Friend repeated the stale joke of Sydney Smith, in vindication of his view of declining wealth -namely, that the "Three per Cents were the greatest fools in the country." I differ from my noble Friend. The great monied interest is tolerably alive to its own interest, and I still subscribe to the oldfashioned notion that the state of the funds is a tolerable barometer of the confidence, or want of confidence, reposed in a Government by that interest. I venture to state, therefore, and I do so with great respect, but at the same time with great satisfaction, that neither in the state of the funds, nor in any expression of feeling on the part of the monetary and commercial interest of the country, can I gather that the slightest apprehension has been caused by the measures of Her Majesty's present Government. But I should like to know how it is, if as my noble Friend has alleged, the funds have kept up only in consequence of being relieved from the alarm which was felt as to the measures which the Government was expected to bring forward-how it is that the funds did not fall under the apprehension of these hyper-dangerous measures? When the present Government came into office the funds were at 96. They have ever since kept gradually creeping up, and in a few months, notwithstanding the alleged dangerous views of the Government, and the alarm they had spread, the funds touched 100; and from that time to this, despite

the apprehensions of my noble Friend, they have never been below 100. I venture to assume this as a fair indicationmaking due allowance for all the circumstances which may tend to keep down the interest for money, and which may conse quently affect the funds, and taken in con. nexion with, to say the least, the absence of any hostile opinion on the part of the great commercial classes-no apprehension is felt that there will be a failure of the public credit in consequence of the measures of Her Majesty's Government; and I venture also to express my conviction that the funds would be much more likely to fall from the apprehension of the consequences arising from the settlement of the present state of things, and of the disso, lution of the present Government, than from the carrying of those measures which we hope (although my noble Friend says it is the worst hope which our worst enemy would utter) to see carried into effect. I do not allude to the minor details, but to the substance of those propositions which my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has submitted to the other House of Parliament, and which in due time will come before your Lordships for your decision.

LORD MONTEAGLE said a few words. in explanation; he was understood to say that Government ought to impose those taxes only which could be conveniently collected.

The EARL of DERBY said, he must protest against the doctrine which he supposed to be peculiar to an ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer, that a Government need not mind the justice of a tax so long as they could procure money. He had never said that free trade necessarily contemplated the absence of all imposts; but he had contended that free trade did contemplate the absence of disproportionate import duties, more especially duties upon articles of general consumption. He did not know his noble Friend's views of proportion or disproportion, but he (the Earl of Derby) thought that 200 or 250 per cent on articles of consumption fell within the definition of disproportionate taxation. Nor did he think that those classes upon whom that duty fell could be termed a privileged class, because they complained of such disproportionate taxation.

On Question, agreed to.

LOANS TO RATEPAYERS IN COUNTIES.

The EARL of POWIS moved for a Re

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON said, the hon. Gentleman had put a series of questions founded on the arrival of the Queen of the South only a few hours previously, the despatches of which had been only so short a time in his hands that he had not had the opportunity of ascertaining all their contents. Nevertheless, he thought he should be able to give a satisfactory answer to these questions. He was sorry to say, as regarded the first, that he would be hardly justified in stating to the House that the Kafir war was at an end; but he was fully justified in stating that the stronghold of the enemy-the Waterkloof-was entirely clear of Kafirs, and in the hands of General Cathcart, whose expression was that he "hoped it was now clear of an enemy for ever. In the Amatolas district, the rebellious chiefs-Sandili, Macomo, and their followers-were still sheltered; but the troops were in active pursuit of themindeed, they had nearly been arrested by the gallantry and bravery of our officers; and he was glad to say that he believed no danger existed as regarded them. With respect to the second question, he had no reason whatever to suppose that the war had extended to the north-east frontier, or indeed that it had spread in any other direction; and he had no knowledge of the other fact adverted to in the third question of the hon. Gentleman. With regard to memorials from Cape Town on the subject of the postponement of the Constitution, he had only received one, besides the despatch of the Government of the Colony. He had, however, received a despatch from Governor Darling on the subject, in which it was stated that no excitement whatever prevailed in the Colony, and that the general feeling was quite satisfactory.

MR. VERNON SMITH said, the right hon. Gentleman had some time ago, in answer to a question from the noble Lord the Member for the City of London (Lord J. Russell), promised to lay the papers on the table in reference to the Constitution at the Cape, and he wished now to know when they would be ready, for he observed they had been read in the Assembly at the Cape, and it was hard they had not obtained them here.

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON said, that the papers moved for by the noble Lord the Member for the City of London, on the subject of the Constitution of the Cape, had not been withheld by any fault of the Colonial Office. They had been only asked for a few days since they were now nearly

ready; and when he had added those received by the last arrival, they should be laid before the House without delay.

SIR DE LACY EVANS said, he also wished to ask a question. The territory called British Kafraria had been hitherto treated as British territory, and he now wished to know whether the right hon.' Gentleman would give them, along with the correspondence that had been promised, the instructions he had sent out as to the character which the territory in question would bear at the conclusion of the war?

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON said, the correspondence on the subject of the future course of the Government with respect to the boundary of British Kafraria, at the conclusion of the war, was not one of the papers moved for by the noble Lord the Member for the City of London. The subject involved in that question was very extensive, and by no means of an easy nature, for it referred not only to the eastern boundary, but also to the northern boundary of the Colony. He was, however, in correspondence with General Cathcart on the subject of the eastern boundary-he had sent a despatch by the last mail, but till he had received an answer he could not give a reply to the question of the hon. and gallant Member.

MR. HINDLEY said, he would beg to ask the right hon. Secretary for the Colonies, if the statements which had appeared in the Cape newspapers were true— namely, that Kafirs taken in the clearing of the Waterkloof were immediately hung; and if so, whether this was justified by the laws of war?

As regarded

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON said, he had no official knowledge of the fact alluded to in the first part of the question. No mention was made in any of the despatches he had received of executions. the second part of the question-with respect to the rules of war-he apprehended that the rule of war was, that when an enemy showed no quarter, to meet him in a similar spirit; but, on the other hand, he had no hesitation in saying to execute a prisoner was not consistent with the laws of war. It should, however, be always borne in mind that a great portion of the Kafirs and Hottentots engaged in this war were British subjects, and as such were guilty of high treason. He certainly had seen in a newspaper, and he had also heard it through a private channel, that in clearing the Waterkloof some persons were hung

under what circumstances he could not

say; but he would not be doing justice to the extreme gallantry and bravery of both officers and soldiers employed in that task, if he believed for a moment that they had, by any unnecessary act of cruelty to the enemy, tarnished the high reputation which they had so nobly acquired.

MR. HINDLEY: Would the right hon. Gentleman make inquiry into the truth of the statement?

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON said, he should have added that he had seen the general orders issued by General Cathcart to the troops prior to the expedition across the Kei, and that one of the most distinct orders among them was to avoid any unnecessary loss of life. He (Sir J. Pakington) had, however, no objection to make inquiry into the statement; but he should also observe at the same time that he had the fullest confidence in the humanity and discretion of General Cathcart, as well as in the bravery and gallantry of the troops.

WAYS AND MEANS THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT ADJOURNED DEBATE (THIRD NIGHT).

Order for Committee read.
Debate resumed.

SIR DE LACY EVANS said, a desire had been expressed on the previous night that the discussion should, if possible, be concluded that evening. It had, however, only lasted as yet two nights, and it must be remembered that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with all his skill as an orator, had been compelled to occupy nearly the whole of one night in the development of his plan. He (Sir De L. Evans) thought, then, it was rather too much to expect that the whole of the representatives of the country should be called upon to decide in two evenings upon this important subject. Again, only one metropolitan Member had yet had an opportunity of addressing the Committee upon it. Another reason was, that time ought to be given for the opinion of the country to be expressed with regard to it; and on all these grounds he hoped the Committee would not be pressed to a decision to-night.

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHE. QUER: I am sure, Sir, there is no Member in this House who is less inclined to throw any difficulties in the way of Gentlemen expressing their opinions than myself, and I am sure I have never exhibited any desire to restrict our debates. I am perfectly aware that when measures of this

extent are brought forward it is extremely desirable that a sufficient interval should elapse to enable the country fully to consider them, and that there should be ample discussion in this House; but I cannot but remember the moment at which we are assembled, and the absolute necessity that there is for the House adjourning for a considerable period. I assure the House that nothing is more foreign to my nature, or more repugnant to the wishes of the Government, than in any way to precipitate a conclusion upon any great constitutional point on which the will of the House has not been perfectly expressed. The hon. and gallant Gentleman referred to my statement; but he must recollect that that statement included a great variety of subjects. I do think it would be only fair to the Government if before the holidays we could take one vote. I do not want in any way to narrow the issue. I wish, if I possibly can, to put it on a principle. I do not ask any Gentleman on either side of the House, by voting on this occasion, to come to any direct vote in favour of the repeal of the Tea Duties, or the Hop Duties, or the Malt Duty, or of any detail of the Income Tax, or even of the mere details of the vote on which we are to come to an issue to-night. All I ask the House is, that it will at least affirm what we consider a vital principle, and that it will allow us to bring forward measures of financial reform (not merely with reference to the particular plans we propose) which depend upon the country. being agreed to bear a certain quantity of direct taxation. I do not ask any Gentleman to be in the least pledged by the vote he may come to to-night to any details of this Resolution. I only ask you to affirm that the area of direct taxation should be extended.

House in Committee.
Question again proposed-

That, towards raising the Supply granted to Her Majesty, from and after the 5th day of April, 1853, the Duties granted and made payable by Dwelling Houses in Great Britain, according to the Act 14 & 15 Vict. c. 36, upon Inhabited the annual value thereof, shall cease and determine, and in lieu thereof there shall be granted and made payable upon all such Dwelling Houses the following Duties (that is to say)" :

VISCOUNT JOCELYN said, he regretted that he should stand for a moment in the way of hon. Gentlemen expressing their opinions, whose opinions were of far higher value than his; but at the same time he would be sorry to give a vote upon a question differing from those with whom he had