maritime Power, the writer has sought to examine whether the Declaration of 1856 in favour of neutrals is calculated to induce her now to adopt the opposite rule. Since writing, he has not met with any arguments leading him to alter the views he has expressed, or convincing him that Britain would act wisely in placing reliance upon anything else than her naval superiority. It must ever be borne in mind that apart from the light of analogies, the only test either of the Paris Declaraor of any further convention would be the result, in the long run, of a war in which important interests were at stake. To allege apprehensions of danger to have arisen among insurers or freighters, on rumours of war, seems really beside the question. In pursuing the object he had in view, the writer was not led to do more than refer to what is undoubtedly a most important inquiry, and which probably ought to take precedence of all others connected with this subject, viz., whether the proposal to exempt all private property from war risk be worthy of approval on the score of humanity. If this were satisfactorily established, the judgment of right thinking men (it may be presumed) would declare that no selfish consideration should induce England to perpetuate a contrary policy. But not only has the proposition not hitherto been made out, but the balance of argument seems entirely the other way. As it is idle to dream of wars being carried on without injury and suffering (the infliction of which are indeed its very essence), the question comes to be whether it is better that the efforts of belligerents should be directed in part against the wealth and material resources of their opponents, or centred wholly on destroying the lives of their soldiers and sailors. Under which system will the bulk of a nation care most anxiously that peace should be preserved? Under which will peace be most speedily restored when unfortunately broken? There can be little doubt how these questions fall to be answered. It is fallacious to argue that the increased importance, at the present time, of maritime commerce, or the increased efficiency of modern warlike appliances for its interruption, change the conditions of the problem. The motives bearing upon national opinion may have become stronger; but the augmented efficacy of a remedy would be a strange reason for disusing it altogether. It is impossible, however, within the compass of a note, to do any justice to this topic. Report of the Standing Committee of the Department. IT having been agreed that the Committee of this Department should present a report to the annual meeting on any measures brought before Parliament, or any circumstances of a public nature, relating to international law, or to production, commerce, and trade, we have now to report as follows: During the past session of Parliament various motions were made and questions put with reference to circumstances arising out of the contest between the Federal and Confederate States of North America; but as these were all more or less of a party character, the Committee do not consider it to be within their province to advert to any of them. It would be still more remote from the objects of the Committee to make any observations on the policy of the British Government in seizing vessels which are being fitted out in the ports of this country for the service of one of the belligerents, or on the ruling of the Lord Chief Baron in the Alexandra case, against which a roll of exceptions has been tendered, and on which the Court of Exchequer Chamber will have to pronounce judgment. The Committee have only to express the hope that the difficulties which have arisen may lead to the law on this subject being placed on a safe and reasonable footing. A Bill was introduced in the House of Commons by Mr. Ewart for decimalizing our existing system of weights and measures, and for establishing an accordance between them and those of foreign countries. The Bill passed a second reading, but was not proceeded with further. Different opinions have been formed as to the merits of this measure, even among the advocates of the decimal system; but as the Bill, from the support it received in the House, is likely to be again brought forward, the Committee recommend it to the consideration of the Department. The Bill of Mr. Scholefield, to amend the law relating to partnership, is also deserving of attention. This measure, which proposes to introduce the principle of limited liability into private partnerships, after being amended by a Select Committee of the House of Commons, passed that House, and was brought into the House of Lords, where it was read a first time, From the lateness of the period in the session at which the Bill arrived in the Upper House, no further steps were taken with reference to it, The Bill originally provided for the registration of all partnerships, but as amended, this provision was restricted to partnerships where the liability is to be limited. As the Bill will without doubt be again brought forward, the machinery of the measure ought in the mean time to be carefully considered, The Committee may mention that a proposal has been made by a leading public journal for the establishment of a minister of agriculture. Although there are great difficulties connected with such a scheme, the suggestion is certainly deserving of consideration. The subject of international copyright in works of literature and art, which has already occupied the attention of this Department, has been brought before the Law Amendment Society, and referred to a committee. There is every prospect that the committee will thoroughly inquire into the subject, and take activé measures to carry into effect the views at which it may arrive. The Department was established at the Glasgow Meeting, 1860, for the consideration, by representatives of all nations, of questions of International Law, and for the collection of information relating to production, manufacture, and trade. SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS. In addition to the papers printed in the foregoing pages, the following were read in the Department :— "Direct Taxation and Freedom of Trade." Liverpool Financial Reform Association. "Evils of Indirect Taxation, and their Remedy." By George Smith. "Observations upon the Banking and Currency Laws of the United Kingdom." By James Delahunty. "On the Manner in which the British Paper Manufacture is affected by Foreign Legislation." By John Evans. "On the Effects of Recent Legislation on British Paper Manufacture." By Thomas Wrigley. 66 Agriculture as a Commercial Pursuit." By Peter McLagan. "The Town and Port of Leith since 1800." By D. Henderson. "Remarks on the Rise and Progress of Manufacturing at Hawick, South of Scotland." By Walter Wilson. "Dunfermline Linen Trade, Past and Present." By Thomas N. Brown. The Origin, Purpose, Progress, and Results of the attempt to grow Cotton in Jamaica by means of the free and fairly compensated labour of our own emancipated peasantry." By Stephen Bourne. "Monetary Decimals." By James Alexander. By J. R. Lowndes. By P. H. Rathbone. "Valuation of Ships." By Thos. S. Paton. "On International Law." By James Anderson, Q.C. "An International Congress and Tribunal for the Prevention of War." By John Noble. TAXATION. Mr. C. E. MACQUEEN, Secretary to the Financial Reform Association, read a paper advocating the principles of that association, which he defined as follows: 1. That each subject should contribute to the just necessities of the State in some fair or approximate proportion to his means and the advantages he enjoys under State protection, so that taxation shall come to be considered a just debt, not to be shirked or repudiated by any honest man any more than any other debt. 2. That taxation should take and keep out of the pockets of the people as little as possible beyond what it yields to the public Exchequer. 3. That the public revenue should be raised from the property and wealth of the nation, not from the wants, comforts, and necessities of the people. 4. That taxation should be imposed in such a manner that the honest industry of no man shall be restricted or prevented by Custom-house officer or exciseman, but every man be left at perfect liberty to conduct his lawful business without prejudice to others, in the way he thinks best for his own interest, and to exchange the products of the labour, skill, or capital, for the products of the labour, skill, or capital of every other man on the face of the earth, the public revenue being raised from the profits of labour, past or present, finally realized and verified, not from its processes or uncompleted operations, the results of which, in profit or loss, are yet contingent and uncertain. The paper was published at length and circulated with the Financial Reformer.* Mr. GEORGE SMITH advocated in his paper the same principles. After pointing out the evils of indirect taxation, he said, .the remedy was to abolish custom and excise duties altogether, and to levy whatever revenue might be necessary for the good government and security of the State from the property and wealth of the country, not from the food, drink, clothing, or other necessaries or comforts of the struggling masses, on whose wellbeing that of the rest of the community depended. * Published by the Financial Reform Association, Liverpool. DISCUSSION. Mr. JEFFERY begged leave to inform the President and the meeting that an invitation to attend and take part in the discussion had been sent by the Council of the Financial Reform Association to Mr. Cobden. That gentleman was, unfortunately, unable to comply with it, but he had sent a letter, which it would be well to have read before the discussion commenced. The PRESIDENT and the meeting having acquiesced in the proposition, the following letter was read by Mr. Macqueen : : "Midhurst, Oct. 3, 1863. "DEAR SIR,-As I shall not be in Edinburgh at the approaching meeting of the Social Science Association, it will not be in my power to take part in your discussion respecting the comparative demerits of direct and indirect taxation. I say demerits, because it is really little more than a question as to the form in which we shall tolerate a necessary evil; but, admitting the necessity of raising a given sum of money for the expenses of Government, there can really be no argument, in the abstract, why it should not be raised in that form which is the least costly and inconvenient for the public. I say in the abstract, because I know all the advantage which the advocacy of an abstract principle gives in bringing your 'practical' man to subjection. Nobody can deny that Customs and Excise duties, and other indirect taxes, are more costly in the collection than a direct levy of taxation; and nobody, who has examined the subject, can doubt that they obstruct commerce, impede manufactures, and check the production of wealth. If a proof of this be required, compare the progress of a free port like Hamburg with a Customs-bound place like Havre. As to the difficulty of substituting direct or indirect taxation, that is a task for statesmen to accomplish. Once convince the public of the soundness of your principle, and you will soon have a Huskisson, a Peel, and a Gladstone ready to put them into practice. The local legislation of our town-councils has already shown the way. The municipal governments of our cities contrive to raise their funds by a direct tax, instead of an octroi, which is considered an impossible achievement by the towns of the Continent. Now, what are the taxes on tea, sugar, coffee, &c., levied at our Custom-houses, but so many octroi dues on a large scale? How impossible it would be to put up barriers at the entrance to Edinburgh or Manchester to collect the municipal rates in the clumsy form of a duty on the daily supplies of those cities; and I am as firmly convinced as of my existence, that if we could have for a few years that experience of all the advantages which an abolition of import duties into this kingdom would give us, it would be as impossible to replace the Custom-house as a substitute for the collector of direct taxes, as it would now be to levy octroi dues at the suburbs of our large towns instead of the direct rates which are collected from house to house for municipal purposes. Of course, you will be met by politicians of all parties with the assertion that your plan is impracticable, which means only that it cannot be at present adopted with advantage by either of the existing political parties; but, I repeat, if you can beat your opponents in the field of abstract argument, you will, sooner or later, find statesmen who will be proud to give a legislative triumph to your principles. It is only a question of time. "Believe me, yours faithfully, "R. COBDEN. "C. E. Macqueen, Esq." Mr. BARUCHSON, of Liverpool, said he was in Brussels last year when this question was discussed, and there was only one opinion there, viz., that the Custom-house, should be abolished. But, then, the only proposition made was that it should be done by a reduction of military expenditure-by dispensing with a standing army. The neutrality of the country being guaranteed by Europe, the Belgian free-traders held that there was no occasion for a standing army. If we could dispense with our standing army, and depend upon volunteers in case of invasion, we too might abolish the Custom-house; but so long as France, Russia, and Austria kept armies of 600,000 men on foot, how could this be done? Holland, since she had diminished her Customs duties, had so greatly increased in prosperity that she had been enabled not only to pay off part of her national debt, but to expend large sums on railways and other public works. The abolition of Customs and Excise would be beneficial to all classes of the |