NEWS OF THE WEEK.
THE Chancellor of the Exchequer has made his second Financial Statement, necessitated by the new demand on the public purse
for the past expenses of the war with China. The House of Commons made the best of a bad business. The money had been spent, and the only thing to be done was to raise it, so as to pro- duce the least possible amount of inconvenience. It was not an easy task for Mr. Gladstone to explain why he had not made provision for the sum of 3,800,000/. in February last. It would seem, however, that Ministers did not then believe that there would be any Chinese war. They thought that the expedition Would be a peaceful expedition, and that the Chinese would be awed by the presence of a superior force into carrying out the terms of the Lord Elgin Treaty. It is now too late to discuss *bat might have been. The House of Commons was only anxious, on Monday night, to learn how it was proposed to raise the money. The sum set apart in February, for the expenses of
the war, was 850,000/. charged on the Finances of 1859-60, aid twice that sum charged on the Finances of 1860-61, making in
all 2,550,000/. Now the money spent, including 450,000/.
carried over from the former war, is 5,850,0001. The deficit of 3,800,000/. is to be supplied partly by the surplus, estimated in February, at 464,0007., but which has now dwindled down to 264,000/., partly by 500,000/. included in the provision of February, and partly by the produce of the Paper-duty, now estimated at 700,000/. for the financial year. There still remains a deficit of 2,336,000/., out of which 1,000,0001. will be raised by an additional duty on ardent spirits, home, foreign, and colonial, of Is. 11d, per gallon, and the rest will be provided by the balances in the Exchequer. Mr. Gladstone stated that the Government will not make any further demand on the taxation of the country for the present "year." In other words, the sum' required for the fortification' of our ports and arsenals will be raised by a loan.
Mr. Newdegate has made a futile attempt to extend the short- time movement to the House of Commons. Mr. Newdegate could never have hoped to carry a resolution pledging the House not to proceed with any notice or orders which would lead to dis- cussion after one o'clookin the morning, at the same tilne, some measures must really be taken to enable the House of Commons to get through the business of the country. Session after session passes away, and nothing is done. It is of no use to say that this is a question for the good sense of Members themselves. In the present session, things have been worse than ever, and the House will do well to take the matter into serious consideration. On Thursday night, for instance, to the apparent satisfaction of the weary Commons, Sir Richard Bethel withdrew his Bank- ruptcy Bill. The alleged reason' was the opposition excited by the clauses abolishing the distinction between traders and non- traders, and the impossibility of getting the measure through the Lower House in time to allow of its being properly discussed by the Peers.
Lord Derby has also called attention to the mode of conducting pubhe business in the House of Lords. His complaint is, that the Upper House is practically denied the right of originating measures, and that a whole session is lost, while their Lordships are anxiously expecting the arrivals of the bills from the Com- mons. There may be some force in the complaint, but the coun-
try will hardly look with favour on the proposal that the proro- gation should be considered as an adjournment, so that bills might be taken up in succeeding sessions at the point at which they were left in preceding ones.
The Privilege Question has once more, and certainly for the last time this year, been brought before the Commons. Lord Fermoy, faithful to his pledges, moved that "the rejection by the House of Lords of the bill for the repeal of the Paper Duties, is an encroachment on the rights and privileges of the House of Commons ; and it is, therefore, incumbent on this House to adopt a practical measure for the vindication of its rights and privi- leges." Lord Palmerston moved the previous question, and, with the exception of Sir J. Trelawny and a few other Liberals, Lord Fermoy received no support from his own side of the House. Curiously enough, however, he was supported by Mr. Disraeli, who hit upon the ingenious discovery that Ministers should have met the motion by a direct negative. The motion was finally rejected by 177 to 138. There have been two debates on education during the past week., Mr. Adderley, who has some title to be listened to on such questions, wishes to render the education of young children compulsory. He thinks that no children under twelve years of age should be employed in any continuous labour unless they were able to read and write, or unless an undertaking were given that they should receive education for at least twenty hours in the month. The bill was rejected by a majority of 71, the num- bers being 122 to 51. It was quite absurd to expect any other result, at this late period of the session.
The other educational debate arose out of a motion by Mr. Butt, the object being to change the National system, as it is carried out at present in Ireland, on the ground that it is open to the charge of unfairness. Mr. Butt would put an end to the mixed system of education altogether—a system be it remem- bered, which has produced some excellent results in Ireland during nearly thirty years. A division took place, and Mr. Butt's motion was negatived by a majority of 196 to 62.
