cheering, intermingled with some laughter.] He repeated it, he loved the agricultural interest; for habit no less than interest attached him to it; and yet, notwithstanding the attachment which he felt towards it, he would say, that there was not any one class of persons in the country less interested in the repeal of the malt-tax than the landed interest. That certainly was not a tax which he would take off to relieve the farmer, supposing that he were inclined to consent to a reduction of taxation to the amount of a million and a half annually. If he thought it practicable to reduce the annual amount of the taxes by that sum-which he did not-and the House had expressed its opinion to be in concurrence with his own on a motion recently made by the hon. member for Abingdon (Mr. Maberly), he should propose the repeal of the window-tax in preference to that of the malt-tax. There were many other taxes by which the poorer classes were more immediately affected; for instance, the salt-tax; and, if he stood in a situation in which he could at once gratify his own feelings and indulge the wishes of the people by reducing the taxes under which they laboured, he should certainly fix upon that tax before the malt-tax. He must, however, protest against this method of taking off taxes in the present state of the finances of the country, without any adequate reason being shown for the reduction. He must always resist any attempt to propagate a belief that the House was unwilling to alleviate the burthens of the people. At present it was willing, but totally unable to alleviate them. Taxes might indeed be taken off; but would any member contend, that the remission of 2,000,000l. of taxes would give a relief to the community equal to the detriment which would be inflicted upon it by the breach of faith with the public creditor, which would inevitably result from such a remission?

The course of his argument had now brought him to the consideration of the third point which he had stated to belong to this subject; and he was certain, that it required no appeal from him to induce the House to do its duty, according to the plan to which it had pledged itself in the resolution which the clerk had read. He was sure that the hon. member for Essex would not contend, that though it was requisite in 1819 to have a surplus of revenue to support the public credit, it was

not requisite to have such surplus at present. Certainly the pressure on the agricultural interest had been great since that period, and its acuteness had been considerably aggravated by the length of its continuance. He thought, however, that it had been greatly exaggerated, though he would allow, that in some parts of the country it was so excessive, that it would be impossible to colour it too highly. In those parts of the country that portion of relief which a measure like the present would afford, would be too inconsiderable for any person to feel it; and, whilst making such a declaration, he must be permitted to observe, that it was a superficial expectation to hold out to the country that it was from the remission of taxation that the farmer was to obtain relief. Now, from the evidence already taken before the committee ap pointed to examine into the causes of agricultural distress, it was proved to demonstration that it was not taxation but the price of produce that was the cause of the farmer's distress. It was proved, that if you could withdraw all taxation from his expenses, he would hardly be eased by such a reduction. To state, therefore, that a repeal of the malt-tax which did not touch them as farmers, but only as consumers, would be a great benefit to them, was not to act the part of a real friend to the interest of the farmer. In 1819, when that resolution was passed, the manufacturer was in a state of great distress; he had not, however, asked for the enactment of any measure which was calculated to overturn it; and yet he was now in a state of considerable improvement. The agriculturist was now in the same state that the manufacturer was then, and he trusted, nay he was confident, that if he showed equal reliance on the wisdom of parliament, the day was not far distant when similar amelioration would betide him.

Having now performed his first duty to the House, in showing that there was nothing in the working of the malt tax that rendered it necessary to repeal it, and also that if any tax ought to be repealed, it must be some other than the malt tax, he would proceed to show the state in which the country would be placed supposing the tax to be repealed. The House would recollect that this tax was the principal one on which his right hon. friend, the chancellor of the exchequer, had relied, to carry into effect the system

of his budget, though that system had not produced a surplus of 5,000,000l. as had been anticipated, he was sure that the noble lord opposite would not say, that because the surplus was only two millions and a half, therefore they ought to part with it altogether. He was of opinion that the noble lord would agree with him in thinking that they ought to maintain the progress which they had already made, and not relax in their exertions; for by so doing the period could not be far distant when the salutary views of parliament in passing that resolution would be accomplished. He trusted, therefore, that the House would allow him shortly to enter into the arrangements which had been made, to create that surplus of revenue. It had long been a subject of reproach to his majesty's ministers, that they allowed the revenue to float on without any fixed or constant system, supporting it by exchequer bills or loans, just as might be convenient to them; so that there was nothing like a sinking fund, and no real surplus of visible revenue. It was said, that ministers acted upon such a system in order that they might continue to swim quietly down the stream of power, and refrain from changing it from a fear of losing their places. This he denied to have been the case; for, right or wrong, ministers had then maintained, that it was not proper to impose fresh taxes upon the community at a moment under which they were suffering considerable pressure. They had therefore, to avoid the necessity of imposing such taxes, made at that time considerable reductions. In the present year also they had made a reduction to the amount of a million and a half. They were still occupied in making further reductions, nor would they cease to make them until they reached that point, at which, by the dilapidation occasioned by pushing reduction too far, greater mischief would occur than at present. What, then, was the law which ministers had observed in the imposition of fresh taxes? They had not imposed them un til 1819; because, if they had proposed them at an earlier period, parliament might have said to them-" We will not give in to your system of taxation, until you show that it is not only rational and practicable, but also sufficient for your purposes." They had therefore waited until they knew what contingencies it was probable they would have to meet; and

he would now put it to the hon. member for Essex, whether he thought that it would contribute to the public credit of the country either at home or abroad, if the House of Commons were now, within two years from the time in which it passed the resolution, stating the necessity of having a surplus revenue of 5,000,000l. to turn round and say, that the country was so bankrupt in means and expectances as to be obliged to abandon the pledge which it had solemnly given to its creditors, and by the repeal of the malt tax to repeal the system of finance which it had previously adopted? What would be the consequence of such a measure among foreign nations? Would the influence of the country in the preservation of peace be increased by the knowledge that it had changed the whole system, which it had only adopted in the last two years, for the sake of diffusing amongst its popula tion the benefits to be derived from the remission of 2,000,000l. of taxes? What would be the consequence with regard to the fundholder if such an avowal were to be made-if he were to be informed, that his dividend was to be paid not out of any surplus revenue, but some new and precarious loan? The repeal of the malt tax, therefore, could not operate as a practical relief. On the contrary, it would create considerable pressure by weakening, if it did not entirely subvert, the foundations upon which public credit rested.

He trusted that the House, in their consideration of the present question, would put the government entirely out of its view; for it was not a question between the House and the government, but a question between the House and the country. It ought therefore to be decided, after a reference of its bearings upon all the great public interests of the country. He must, however, say for himself, that if the House should think fit to repeal the tax, he should not wish to continue a member of the government of the country, whilst it was under the degraded situation of having a revenue only equal to its expenditure, and under the dangerous contingency of having that revenue even below it. The credit of the country had generally been placed high above the waters, and not in places where the waves could break over it. He had now submitted to the House the grounds on which he thought it would be a suicidal measure to repeal the malt tax. As far as reductions could be made, the hon. member for

Essex had a right to call upon government to make them; but it was not consistent with the duty of government to make such reductions as would leave the country in a helpless situation. No man felt more than he did the pressure under which it laboured at present; but he had never been more convinced of any truth than he was of this-that he was serving the agricultural interest of the country by refusing his assent to a measure which would shake public credit from its basis without affording any relief to that interest which it was especially intended to benefit. The noble lord sat down amidst considerable cheering.

Mr. Coke, of Norfolk, said, he gave his cordial support to the bill. The system which had been acted upon, and which he had opposed for the last 25 years, had brought the country to the state to which he had always expected it would be brought. He almost regretted that he had lived thus long to see the country in its present state. Dire taxation was the cause of the existing distress. But it was said, the public debt must not be reduced. God forbid, that it should be improperly reduced! but in time, if something were not done, this might become unavoidable. It was said, the House must not break faith with the public creditor. But had that House not already broken its faith? He had been a member of it for 40 years, and had never known it to keep faith in any case. In his opinion, a reform of the system was necessary. The noble lord had said, that the repeal of the malt tax would not benefit the landed interest. In reply to this he would refer the noble lord to the experience of the years 1815 and 1817. In those years barley was only 18s. the quarter. The malt tax was repealed, and the barley rose to a remunerating price, and no complaint was heard on the subject until the chancellor of the exchequer imposed a new malt tax. The price of barley upon this again declined.

Lord A. Hamilton rose amid loud cries of" question." After the reception he had encountered, he felt little disposition to occupy their time; but although he might have some difficulty in justifying to the House a trespass upon its attention, he should have still more in justifying, when he met his constituents, a silent vote upon the subject in debate. The noble lord then went on to answer the arguments employed against the bill. He

wished to know from the noble lord opposite, who treated expenditure as a question of convenience, whether absolute necessity might not compel a reduction in the expenses of the country. The noble lord talked of the impossibility of remaining in office under any deficiency of the needful supplies; but he remembered the fate of the income tax; he remembered the instances in which the estimates for the year had been sent back by the House; and his experience of what had happened upon those occasions guarded him from being alarmed at the hints which the noble lord had thrown out. He next adverted to a noble lord near him (lord Fife) who had voted against ministers upon the present question, and who had since been removed from a situation which he held about the royal person. That noble lord had been actuated by a regard for the interests of his country, and the wishes of his constituents: he could not have voted otherwise consistently with his own honour and with the principles which he had always professed. He trusted that the example of that noble lord would operate as a lesson to members of parliament, and that it would teach them that there were situations the maintenance of which was inconsistent with parliamentary independence.

The Earl of Fife stated the reluctance he felt to be obliged to intreat the indulgence of the House for a short time; but placed as he was by what had fallen from the noble lord, it was impossible to avoid making a few observations. He was not often ambitious of engaging the attention, or occupying the valuable time of the House, and it would be more congenial to his feelings not to speak on the subject alluded to. Occasions might occur, when to be silent would warrant a conclusion to be drawn which he little wished, and hoped not to deserve. He had no hesitation, however, in declaring, that the hasty mode adopted lately regarding the office he held in the king's family, was not rendered more necessary at the present moment than for a year pastand certainly by no change of conduct on his part. Sufficiently did he announce a considerable time ago, by communications and explanations addressed to a proper quarter, his desire and readiness to retire, from his inability to attend regularly to the duties, and some of them in parliament, to prevent disagreement-owing much to being obliged to watch over the