The Express.
London, England, 1849-03-15 00:00:00

per yard en all the cottons and calicoes manufactured in
Great Britain. The Excise officers would have to go at all
hours of the night into the factories, in order to regulate
their production; and he doubted much if it would then ne
heard that the tax fill wholly on the consumer. His
experience told him that the farmers did not care
much about the malt tax. What they wanted was
equal razatien, and a relief front the burthens
which they bore, whilst other classes escaped. They would
, at once be relieved by =eh a measure to the amount of
6,000.0001. a year—whereas the repeal of the malt tax
would compromise the honour of England, and her ability to
nay the demands on her. It had been stated by his right
hon. friend opposite that the speeches made by the
agriculturists had exaggerated the distress which pre-
vailed in that class. But the manufacture sitting be-
hind him well knew that the distress really did
exist; and they knew, moreover, that the labour-
ing population suffered severely in courque au. The
bait of the repeal of the malt tax had been thrown out
by hon. gentlemen nppcstte with the solo view. he believed,
of creating amend between the farmers and the landowners,
and of persuading them to quarrel with their best friends.
(Cheers from the protectionists.) ,Under these circumstances
he could not support the 1310d311 of the hon. member for
Montrose ; but must support the proposition of his hon.
friend, which he looked upon as one of the clearest and
ablest statements that had ever been submitted to that
house. (Hear, hear.) He assured the house and the go-
vernment that the agricultural interest was in a most de-
pressed condition, and he fel: convinced that it was no tem-
porary depression which would soon pass away. No person
could be more desirous than he was to maintain the revenue
of the country and to avoid embarrassing the government;
but be warned the right hon. gentlemen opposite, unless they
proposed some remedies themselves, or agreed to that fair and
safe remedy which bad been proposed by his hon. friend, that
in addition to the many difficulties which beset them in
other quarters, they would be placed in the dilemma of hav-
ing all the leading interests in the country opposed to them ;
and they wculd be reduced to such a state that it would be
utterly impossible, either for the noble lord or anybody else
to carry on the government of the country with the insti-
tutiors which it possessed. (Chters from the protctionist
benches.)

Colonel THOMPSON said, that the keeping of accounts
was never a point on which he thought himself strong; but
it certainly did appear to him that one item had been left
out of the schedule on the present occasion. He wanted to
know whatcampensation the citriculturixts proposed to make
the country for the protecticn they had so long enjoyed.
(A laugh.) Did they intenOtpropme a duty for the next
twenty years upon home grown corn ; or would they
propose to commute it into an equivalent charge upon rent ?
(A lamb.) He did not gay whether there should be a tax of
205., or 301., or 40s. a quaver upon home-grown corn - but
he did ask for fair compensation . • or if hon. gentlemen
would not give compensation, perhaps they would state
what in their opinion it ought to he ; that once done, their
consciences once satisfied upon that point, the manufac-
turers would give the agriculturists the fairest compensation
for every item on which they could plead that they were un-
duly taxed. He should be very glad to give the bon gen-
tleman leave to grow tobacco, and he was quite ready to ad-
mit that the malt tax, though it was hard and oppreesive
upon the working classes of this country, did in the main
fall upon the landed interest. (Hear, hear.) He admitted
all that; but he first asked for satisfaction upon the point on
which he really had scruples, and then he assured them that
they should find him and his ftiends to be most fair and rea-
sonable men. (Hear, hear.)

The Earl of MARCH said he should vote for the proposi-
tion of his hon. friend the member for Buckinghamshire,
which was characterised not more by its lucidity and apti-
tude than by the ability with which it bad been introduced,
and the soundness of argument with which it bad been sus-
tained. (Hear.) He was surprised to hear the ?lest hon gen-
tlemsn the Chancellor of the Exchequer state that the dis-
tress in the agricultural districts was or a partial nature. He
(the Earl of March) did not believe that that statement was
founded on fact, but that there did exist throughout the
whole of the agricultural districts of this country very great
and deep distress. (Loud cheers from the protectionists.)
They were told when the corn laws were repealed that tie
wages of the labourer would not be diminished, that their
wages would be as great. when wheat was 465. as when it
was 605., and that pauperism would not increase. (Hear.)
What was the fact ? There was expended in relief to the
pew in the seven years when the price of wheat was at the
lowest, 34,466,8161. ; and in the seven years when it was at
the highest only 34,259,4641., being a decrease of 207,3621.
But that was not all. There was the further circumstance to
be taken into account of the difference in the value of corn
at those two periods. That difference amounted to no less
than 30 per cent.; so that if the amount of pauperism were
the same there ought to have been a still less expenditure by
30 per cent., which would make a deereese of no li u than
10,207,3621. expended when wheat was highest as
compared with the period when wheat was lowest. (Hear
hear.) Now he wished to ask ne undue protection tor agri-
culture. He wished that all classes should share
alike; but he would put a eau to the hon.
member for Montrose, and would ask his opinion upon
it. The ease which he was about to put be knew to be an
accurate one. He would rather not mention names, how-
ever, but speak of the persons concerned as A and B. A
had an entailed estate assessed at 5,0001. a year, without the
mansion, and he bad a house in 1.• ndon assumed at 4001.
The estate was directly charged as follows :—For poor,
county, and church rates, 31. id the pound, 7501.; land tax,
791.; income tax on actual rental of 4,6001.,1381.; tenants'
property tea on tenants over 3401. a year, 961. • for rates of
house in London, 601.: making a total of 1,1231. Now,
as opposed to that let them take the case of B, who
had ,0001. • year clear from the funds and annui-
ties. He paid for his house in London, assessed
at 400/. a year, 601.; income tax on 6,0001., 2501. ; so
that whereas A, who had an entailed estate of 5,0001., paid
1,1231. a-year, B, who had 5,0001. a-year clear from funded
property and annuities, paid only 3101. (Cheers.) With
regard to the question of the malt tax, he believed that in the
county with which he was eonnectad the strongest possible
feeling existed that its repeal ought to take place. (Cheers.)
It was looked upon as an unjust tax, and it was held that if
we had free trade in corn we ought to have free trade in
everything. (Hear, hear.) Now, though he was prepared
to you for the repeal of the malt tax, yet he must say that
he was not prepared to vote for the proposition of the hon.
member for Montrose; and for this reason, that the hon. gen-
tleman started by denying that there were burdens which
pressed unduly upon land—
Mr. HUMS.—No; Ido not. I say, "if there are any
special burdens upon land."
The Earl of MARCH continued—Well, that to his mind
implied • doubt—(hear, hear)— but if the hon, gentleman
talked about the non-existence of burdens upon land be
would beg to refer him to Mr. M'Culloch, who in his book
upon taxition stated that the agriculturists would clearly be
justified in demanding, in the event of the free importation
of corn, that it should be charged with a countervailing
fixed duty sufficient to meet the charges which bore pecu-
liarly upon land. Mr. M'Culloch went on to say that it
would be Impossible to retain them that without trampling
epen every principle of justice; and that such protection
would not be given to the agriculturists as a favour, but in
order to keep them on the same level as other dune; of the
country. (Hear, hear.) That opinion he (the Earl of
March) held in common with Mr. M'Culloch, and he felt
convinced since they had repealed the duties upon
foreign produce that they must give protection to the
occupier a lend otherwise he would not be able to bear the
taxation inflicted upon him. (Hear, hear.) The occupiers
of land did not seek an undue proportion of protection. They
ware ready to contribute their fair share toward' the wants
of the state; but they did object to pay more than their
share, and they cams forward now in consequence of the
withdrawal of protection, finding that they could not bear
burdens which, under protection, were tolerable, but which
were 83 too longer. lie called upon the house to look with
favour upon a body which, whilst they were able, had
cheerfully borne the imposts laid upon them, and not to
leave the agricultural interest a victim to mischievous and
reckless legislation. (Cheers.)
On the motion of Mr. M. GIBSON the debate was then
adjourned; and the house adjourned at a few minutes before
6 o'clock until tomorrow (this day).