had property invested in our funds were under some alarm, from the reiteration of principles which went to violate what was always before considered sacred, he had himself the means of knowing. He had lately received a letter from an individual to whom that description belonged, and who earnestly inquired, whether it was true, that after having so long been the bulwark of Europe, we at last entertained the design of committing a breach of faith. The non-payment even of any part of the national debt must be attended with the utter subversation of public credit. Corporations, hospitals, insurance offices, many of them had their whole property thus invested; and so intimately connected was every species of circulating property with the funds, that to interfere with them in any way, so as to depreciate their value, would be little less than to commit an act of felo de se. There was one period in the course of the late wars on the continent, when he was ready to admit, that we saved both ourselves and civil society. Not only was the character of Great Britain raised to proud preeminence, but it became an asylum for property thoughout Europe. We had acted in a spirit of magnanimity and disinterestedness, of which he doubted whether history furnished any example; for whilst we taxed ourselves, we abstained from taxing those foreigners who had placed their property in our funds; more honourable policy never was adopted; and it would be with deep regret, that he should see the credit which it had procured us lost or tarnished by a course so different as that which had been recommended. He feared, that a large sum was owing to the East India company for the entertainment of Buonaparté; which sum was not included in the accounts before the House. With regard to the repeal of the present tax, he objected to it, because he thought it would not relieve the agriculturists, and would very materially diminish the revenue. The only way of extricating the country from its distresses, would be, to cut off, boldly and firmly, all expenditures which were not essentially necessary. The army ought unquestionably to be farther reduced. The navy estimates were not yet before the House, but very large reductions might and must be made in that department.

Sir J. Boughey could not feel himself justified in supporting the repeal of this ax, unless he were assured, by those who VOL. V.

voted for the repeal, that it was looked upon as a measure of economy, and not as a substitute for any other measure of taxation.

Mr. Curwen wished, that the hon. gentleman who spoke last but one, instead of merely talking about his feeling for agricultural distress, would afford relief to the farmer by some practical measure. With regard to the existence of that distress, there could be no doubt. The committee which was pursuing its labours up stairs, was not designed to convince the farmers of their wants, or the landlords of the sufferings of their tenants, but, to satisfy and overcome the unbelief of ministers. On the subject of alleviation, he admitted, that to lower the poor rates would afford great relief; but it was still a mystery how that desirable object was to be effected. There was a great difference between the condition of the fundholder and of the landowner; the fundholder received his 100%. or 1,000l. per annum, clear of all deductions, while the landowner paid no less than 32 per cent in burdens and deductions of various kinds; for instance, he paid 20 per cent for poor rates, 5 per cent for county and highway rates, 5 per cent for repairs, and 2 per cent for collection. Estates in the best condition were liable to these heavy deductions. There was no way so effectual for relieving them as removing those taxes that bore hardest upon them; such, for instance, asthe leather tax, the tax upon soap and candles, and several others. Do away these, which would occasion a defalcation of 5 millions, and he for one would support a property tax of 5 per cent with all his heart. He never should repent having declared his opinion, that the fundholder was bound to pay for the protection of his property as much as any other individual. As to the particular tax, it bore peculiarly on the great body of the people; its removal would not give any great relief to the farmer, except by relieving the consumers of his produce; and that perhaps was the most effectual way of ameliorating the condition of the grower.

Mr. Benett, of Wiltshire, earnestly recommended, that nothing should be done to destroy or to endanger the connexion between the landowner and the fundholder. He was well convinced, that the best customers of the manufacturers were the farmers, and the best customers of the farmers the manufacturers. The interests of the productive classes of the country C

ought never to be separated, much less placed in opposition to each other. He He did not imagine, that at that time of day, the agricultural distress would be disputed. The petitions that had recently loaded the table had been referred to a committee. He doubted whether their inquiries would be productive of the advantage expected; because, after the declarations in various quarters, after the powerful voices upraised in opposition to any change in the corn laws, after the farmers had been told, that the burden of taxation was not to be removed from agriculture, little hope could be indulged of support in the quarter most capable of affording it. It was time for the landowners to take the cause of agriculture into their own hands, and to endeavour to accomplish their own relief. He was as unwilling as any man to break the national faith; but, if the income of the country were so reduced as to leave it unable to pay the interest of the national debt, that result was inevitable. To keep the national faith, taxation must be reduced; yet to reduce taxation was to diminish the means of payment. In what way, then, was general relief to be obtained? With regard to the measure before the House, he did not believe it would afford all the relief to the agricultural interests which some gentlemen imagined. It was calculated rather to relieve the consumer, than the grower of barley. One beneficial effect of it would be, that it would enable the labouring classes of the community, who were the great consumers of this commodity, to brew beer in their own houses; a comfort of which they had for many years been deprived, and a return to which, by removing the temptation of resorting to ale-houses, would tend materially to the improvement of their moral habits. He supposed he should be told, that this bill could not pass, because it would occasion a defalcation in the revenue of 1,200,000l. or 1,400,000l.; but, when it was recollected, that if the price were reduced the consumption would be increased, he had no doubt, that the deficiency would be but trifling.

Mr. Keith Douglas said, he was as sensible as any member, of the difficulties under which the agriculturists laboured, and would go as far as any other to relieve them. The present measure, however, he did not think calculated for their relief. Indeed, no honourable member

had pointed out in what way it could be of service to the farmer. He himself could not view it as a measure beneficial to that class. From the returns, he found, that the consumption of malt, since the imposition of this tax, was as great as it was when the tax had not existed. It was a tax which spread over a very large portion of the community, and did not press heavily on any particular class.

Mr. Bright said, that he was one of those who admitted the existence of great agricultural distress; at the same time he could not deny, that there were many taxes, the abolition of which would be of more importance to the community than that which was now sought to be repealed. The repeal of many of these taxes was loudly called for by the present situation of the country; yet he felt himself bound to vote for the repeal of the tax. Considering the present state of the country and of Europe, he would say, that it ought to be repealed; for he was convinced, that if the resources of government were diminished their vigilance would be increased. It was said, that this principle of reduction began at the wrong end; that the House had first voted the men, and it would be necessary to vote the money for their support. He was not one of those who had joined in such large votes; but let those who so voted look to it; for he considered, that if this burden was removed, reductions might be afterwards made in those estimates which were to come, fully equal to its amount. He called, then, upon those members who were favourable to the repeal of the tax, and who might have joined in the vote for the large military force, to look to every itemwhich was yet unvoted. All classes were distressed; and he was satisfied that the only effectual mode of relief-the only means to place this country in the proud situation in which she had been accustomed to stand, and which, he trusted she would long continue to hold among the nationa of Europe, would be, effectual economy and retrenchment. He was not one o those who would tax the funds to relieve the land, or the land to relieve the funds The interests of both were so mixed up that the injury of one would be the de pression of the other. In this view of th case, he would repeal this tax, in th hope of being able effectually to resist th improvidence of ministers. It was said that the landholder had reason to com plain of the Poor laws and of Tithe

1

such progressive reduction of the national debt, as may adequately support public credit, and to afford to the country a prospect of future relief from a part of its present burthens, it is absolutely necessary, that there should be a clear surplus of the income of the country beyond the expenditure, of not less than 5,000,000l.; and that, with a view to the attainment of this important object, it is expedient now to increase the income of the country, by the imposition of taxes, to the amount of 3,000,000l. per annum."

The resolution having been read, the noble lord said, he could assure the hon. member for Essex, that in rising to redeem his pledge when the bill was introduced; namely, that he would give it his most strenuous opposition, he did so with great pain. It was no inconsiderable source of regret to a person standing in the situation of responsibility which he occupied, to resist, at a moment of pressure, a suggestion from so respectable a member, which had for its object the diminution of the public burthens. But he felt, that in doing so on the present occasion, he was discharging an important public duty to all classes of the community, and to none more than to that great class of the people who were now peculiarly under circumstances of difficulty. Arduous and painful as his task was, it would have been still more so, could he persuade himself, that the repeal of the duty in question would really give relief to those for whose relief it was intended. But, while on the one hand he was convinced, that the interest of the community at large was the true interest of the landholder, so on the other hand he was also persuaded, that if the country were in a situation to allow of the remission of any tax, the duty on malt was not the tax which ought to be selected for that purpose. He had listened with great pain to many of the topics which had fallen from hon. gentlemen in the course of this and preceding debates. He thanked God, however, that the time was now come when sentiments injurious to the credit of the country, or subversive of the great principles of public faith, would not be listened to with favour. He even endeavoured to persuade himself, that those by whom such sentiments were uttered, recoiled from their avowal, and endeavoured to explain them away. He was not afraid, that a British parliament would ever forget those principles of justice and

good faith by which this country had been so long upheld. But, what they had to guard against was, being induced to do that indirectly which no consideration would tempt them to do directly. Now those principles of public faith would be as effectually violated by diminishing the public revenue to such a degree as would compel the government to depend upon precarious loans raised upon a bankrupt exchequer, as they would be by supporting one interest at the expense and to the exclusion of every other. At the outset, therefore, he warned the House, at a moment when the surplus of the revenue was not sufficient to allow of any progress being made in the reduction of the debt, and when the House was quite unable to redeem its pledge of 1819, to guard the public credit against the calamity which a bad year of revenue might suddenly inflict. The line of duty was strictly compatible with the best interests of the country; for it was demonstrable, that the question of relief which the proposition of the hon. member for Essex would afford, would not be such as any individual would be conscious of, and therefore would not carry with it any consolation for an infraction of those principles, the maintenance of which the public credit demanded.

Having thus stated the general principles by which he was influenced in his consideration of this question, he should next proceed to state the grounds on which he should found his opposition to the present bill. There were three points which appeared to him to be particularly deserving the attention of the House. The first was this-Was the country in such a situation with regard to the public creditor, its revenue, its expenditure, as justified it in remitting any particular tax? The next was-Supposing the country to be in such a situation as he had described, was the present the peculiar tax which ought to be remitted? and the third was, whether there was any thing in the working of this tax that afforded to the House a financial motive for repealing it. In his consideration of these three points he would reverse the order in which he had placed them, and would commence with the examination of the last of them. He would ask honourable members who were most conversant with the agriculture of the country, whether they could point out any inconvenience or any injury aris